Radeon HD 6520G vs GRID M3-3020

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GRID M3-3020 with Radeon HD 6520G, including specs and performance data.

GRID M3-3020
2016
4 GB GDDR5
7.07
+882%

M3-3020 outperforms HD 6520G by a whopping 882% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking5941228
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data1.58
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameGM107Sumo
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date18 May 2016 (9 years ago)7 December 2011 (14 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores640320
Core clock speed1033 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1306 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million1,178 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rate52.246.400
Floating-point processing power1.672 TFLOPS0.256 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs4016
L1 Cache320 KBno data
L2 Cache2 MBno data

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16IGP
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1300 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth83.2 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA5.0-

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:

900p75−80
+838%
8
−838%
Full HD55−60
+817%
6
−817%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how GRID M3-3020 and HD 6520G compete in popular games:

  • GRID M3-3020 is 838% faster in 900p
  • GRID M3-3020 is 817% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 32 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.07 0.72
Recency 18 May 2016 7 December 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm

GRID M3-3020 has a 882% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 14% more advanced lithography process.

The GRID M3-3020 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6520G in performance tests.

Be aware that GRID M3-3020 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon HD 6520G is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


5 1 vote

Rate GRID M3-3020 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 156 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6520G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GRID M3-3020 or Radeon HD 6520G, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.