Radeon 625 vs 540X
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon 540X and Radeon 625, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
540X outperforms 625 by an impressive 54% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 767 | 889 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 6.02 | 3.92 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | Lexa | Polaris 24 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 5 September 2018 (8 years ago) | 13 May 2019 (7 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 512 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 980 MHz | 730 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1046 MHz | 1024 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,200 million | 1,550 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 33.47 | 24.58 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.071 TFLOPS | 0.7864 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 8 |
| TMUs | 32 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 128 KB | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 128 KB |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1500 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 48 GB/s | 14.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 19
+58.3%
| 12−14
−58.3%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 13
+117%
|
6−7
−117%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 17
+143%
|
7−8
−143%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 10
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 26
+225%
|
8−9
−225%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 17
+143%
|
7−8
−143%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+57.1%
|
7−8
−57.1%
|
| Fortnite | 62
+377%
|
12−14
−377%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+46.2%
|
12−14
−46.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 17
+183%
|
6−7
−183%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+23.1%
|
12−14
−23.1%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+22.7%
|
40−45
−22.7%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 9−10
+50%
|
6−7
−50%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 20
+150%
|
8−9
−150%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 55
+12.2%
|
45−50
−12.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Dota 2 | 47
+80.8%
|
24−27
−80.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+57.1%
|
7−8
−57.1%
|
| Fortnite | 22
+69.2%
|
12−14
−69.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+46.2%
|
12−14
−46.2%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 10−11
+66.7%
|
6−7
−66.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 15
+150%
|
6−7
−150%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+23.1%
|
12−14
−23.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16
+77.8%
|
9−10
−77.8%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+22.7%
|
40−45
−22.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 18
+125%
|
8−9
−125%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Dota 2 | 44
+69.2%
|
24−27
−69.2%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+57.1%
|
7−8
−57.1%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+46.2%
|
12−14
−46.2%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+23.1%
|
12−14
−23.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+22.7%
|
40−45
−22.7%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 17
+30.8%
|
12−14
−30.8%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−33
+57.9%
|
18−20
−57.9%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+33.3%
|
24−27
−33.3%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
+69.6%
|
21−24
−69.6%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+50%
|
6−7
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Valorant | 16−18
+41.7%
|
12−14
−41.7%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+85.7%
|
7−8
−85.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
This is how Radeon 540X and Radeon 625 compete in popular games:
- Radeon 540X is 58% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 540X is 377% faster.
- in Counter-Strike 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the Radeon 625 is 40% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Radeon 540X performs better in 53 tests (98%)
- Radeon 625 performs better in 1 test (2%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.89 | 2.53 |
| Recency | 5 September 2018 | 13 May 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Radeon 540X has a 54% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Radeon 625, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months.
The Radeon 540X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 625 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
