RTX A5500 vs Radeon HD 7340
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 7340 with RTX A5500, including specs and performance data.
RTX A5500 outperforms HD 7340 by a whopping 13649% 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 | 1354 | 67 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.59 | 17.11 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | Loveland | GA102 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Workstation |
| Release date | 6 June 2012 (14 years ago) | 22 March 2022 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $552.69 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.
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 | 80 | 10240 |
| Core clock speed | 523 MHz | 1080 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 680 MHz | 1665 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | 28,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 230 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.184 | 532.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.08368 TFLOPS | 34.1 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 96 |
| TMUs | 8 | 320 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 320 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 80 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 10 MB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 6 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).
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | IGP | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 8-pin |
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 | System Shared | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 24 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 768.0 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 | 4x DisplayPort 1.4a |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 8.6 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−12900%
|
130−140
+12900%
|
| Palworld | 3−4
−13233%
|
400−450
+13233%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−12900%
|
130−140
+12900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−13233%
|
400−450
+13233%
|
| Palworld | 3−4
−13233%
|
400−450
+13233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−13471%
|
950−1000
+13471%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−13554%
|
3550−3600
+13554%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−13567%
|
2050−2100
+13567%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−12900%
|
130−140
+12900%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−13400%
|
1350−1400
+13400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−13233%
|
400−450
+13233%
|
| Palworld | 3−4
−13233%
|
400−450
+13233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−13471%
|
950−1000
+13471%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−13233%
|
800−850
+13233%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−13554%
|
3550−3600
+13554%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−12900%
|
130−140
+12900%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−13400%
|
1350−1400
+13400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−13233%
|
400−450
+13233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−13471%
|
950−1000
+13471%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−13233%
|
800−850
+13233%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−13554%
|
3550−3600
+13554%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Palworld | 3−4
−13233%
|
400−450
+13233%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−13400%
|
270−280
+13400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 1−2
−12900%
|
130−140
+12900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−12400%
|
500−550
+12400%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−12900%
|
130−140
+12900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
−12900%
|
130−140
+12900%
|
1440p
Epic
| Palworld | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−13567%
|
2050−2100
+13567%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−12900%
|
650−700
+12900%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−12900%
|
130−140
+12900%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−13400%
|
270−280
+13400%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.37 | 50.87 |
| Recency | 6 June 2012 | 22 March 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 230 Watt |
HD 7340 has 1178% lower power consumption.
RTX A5500, on the other hand, has a 13649% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.
The RTX A5500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7340 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 7340 is a desktop graphics card while RTX A5500 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
