Radeon RX 5700 XT vs GRID M3-3020
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GRID M3-3020 with Radeon RX 5700 XT, including specs and performance data.
RX 5700 XT outperforms GRID M3-3020 by a whopping 450% 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 | 574 | 126 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 53 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 38.76 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 13.15 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) |
| GPU code name | GM107 | Navi 10 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 18 May 2016 (9 years ago) | 7 July 2019 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $399 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 cores | 640 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 1033 MHz | 1605 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1306 MHz | 1905 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,870 million | 10,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 225 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 52.24 | 304.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.672 TFLOPS | 9.754 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 64 |
| TMUs | 40 | 160 |
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 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | 267 mm | 272 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin + 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 | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1300 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |
| 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 | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| VR Ready | no data | + |
| Multi Monitor | no data | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | + |
| CUDA | 5.0 | - |
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:
| Full HD | 21−24
−495%
| 125
+495%
|
| 1440p | 12−14
−533%
| 76
+533%
|
| 4K | 8−9
−488%
| 47
+488%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 3.19 |
| 1440p | no data | 5.25 |
| 4K | no data | 8.49 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 347
+0%
|
347
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 78
+0%
|
78
+0%
|
| God of War | 133
+0%
|
133
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 119
+0%
|
119
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 308
+0%
|
308
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 78
+0%
|
78
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 138
+0%
|
138
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 223
+0%
|
223
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 155
+0%
|
155
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 173
+0%
|
173
+0%
|
| God of War | 112
+0%
|
112
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 177
+0%
|
177
+0%
|
| Valorant | 313
+0%
|
313
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110
+0%
|
110
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 177
+0%
|
177
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 75
+0%
|
75
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 92
+0%
|
92
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 130
+0%
|
130
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 179
+0%
|
179
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 154
+0%
|
154
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 152
+0%
|
152
+0%
|
| God of War | 93
+0%
|
93
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 145
+0%
|
145
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 97
+0%
|
97
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 166
+0%
|
166
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 154
+0%
|
154
+0%
|
| Valorant | 294
+0%
|
294
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 105
+0%
|
105
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 67
+0%
|
67
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 103
+0%
|
103
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 111
+0%
|
111
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 148
+0%
|
148
+0%
|
| God of War | 61
+0%
|
61
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 139
+0%
|
139
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 93
+0%
|
93
+0%
|
| Valorant | 159
+0%
|
159
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 143
+0%
|
143
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 105
+0%
|
105
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+0%
|
270−280
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 79
+0%
|
79
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 57
+0%
|
57
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Valorant | 286
+0%
|
286
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 89
+0%
|
89
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40
+0%
|
40
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 97
+0%
|
97
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 119
+0%
|
119
+0%
|
| God of War | 52
+0%
|
52
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 75−80
+0%
|
75−80
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 93
+0%
|
93
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 28
+0%
|
28
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 79
+0%
|
79
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35
+0%
|
35
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 54
+0%
|
54
+0%
|
| Valorant | 242
+0%
|
242
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60
+0%
|
60
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 17
+0%
|
17
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 93
+0%
|
93
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 53
+0%
|
53
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 79
+0%
|
79
+0%
|
| God of War | 32
+0%
|
32
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 53
+0%
|
53
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 45
+0%
|
45
+0%
|
This is how GRID M3-3020 and RX 5700 XT compete in popular games:
- RX 5700 XT is 495% faster in 1080p
- RX 5700 XT is 533% faster in 1440p
- RX 5700 XT is 488% faster in 4K
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 7.05 | 38.78 |
| Recency | 18 May 2016 | 7 July 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
RX 5700 XT has a 450.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 5700 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GRID M3-3020 in performance tests.
Be aware that GRID M3-3020 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX 5700 XT is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
