Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile vs Radeon 625
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon 625 with RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile, including specs and performance data.
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile outperforms 625 by a whopping 881% 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 | 889 | 259 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.92 | 54.91 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) | Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 24 | AD107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 13 May 2019 (7 years ago) | 26 February 2024 (2 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 | 384 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 730 MHz | 1485 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1024 MHz | 2025 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,550 million | 18,900 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 24.58 | 129.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.7864 TFLOPS | 8.294 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 32 |
| TMUs | 24 | 64 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 64 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 96 KB | 2 MB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 12 MB |
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).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
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 | DDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 128.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | Portable Device Dependent |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 8.9 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−829%
|
65−70
+829%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−800%
|
45−50
+800%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−838%
|
75−80
+838%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−829%
|
65−70
+829%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−800%
|
45−50
+800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−823%
|
120−130
+823%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−823%
|
120−130
+823%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−823%
|
120−130
+823%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−809%
|
400−450
+809%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−838%
|
75−80
+838%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−829%
|
65−70
+829%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 45−50
−818%
|
450−500
+818%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−800%
|
45−50
+800%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
−862%
|
250−260
+862%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−823%
|
120−130
+823%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−823%
|
120−130
+823%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−775%
|
35−40
+775%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−823%
|
120−130
+823%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−844%
|
85−90
+844%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−809%
|
400−450
+809%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−838%
|
75−80
+838%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−800%
|
45−50
+800%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
−862%
|
250−260
+862%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−823%
|
120−130
+823%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−823%
|
120−130
+823%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−844%
|
85−90
+844%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−809%
|
400−450
+809%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 12−14
−823%
|
120−130
+823%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−800%
|
45−50
+800%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 18−20
−847%
|
180−190
+847%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
−858%
|
230−240
+858%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−857%
|
220−230
+857%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−800%
|
9−10
+800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−775%
|
35−40
+775%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−817%
|
55−60
+817%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−775%
|
35−40
+775%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
−775%
|
35−40
+775%
|
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
−800%
|
9−10
+800%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−833%
|
140−150
+833%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−817%
|
110−120
+817%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 7−8
−829%
|
65−70
+829%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−800%
|
9−10
+800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−800%
|
27−30
+800%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−800%
|
27−30
+800%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.53 | 24.83 |
| Recency | 13 May 2019 | 26 February 2024 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 35 Watt |
Nvidia RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile has a 881% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 460% more advanced lithography process, and 43% lower power consumption.
The RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 625 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon 625 is a notebook graphics card while RTX 500 Ada Generation Mobile is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
