Radeon R6 (Carrizo) vs GeForce 825M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 825M and Radeon R6 (Carrizo), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GeForce 825M
2014
1 GB DDR3, 33 Watt
2.03
+34.4%

825M outperforms R6 (Carrizo) by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking880971
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.252.98
ArchitectureKepler 2.0 (2013−2015)GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameGK208Carrizo
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date27 January 2014 (10 years ago)4 June 2015 (9 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 cores384384
Core clock speed850 MHzno data
Boost clock speed941 MHz800 MHz
Number of transistors915 million2410 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt12-35 Watt
Texture fill rate30.11no data
Floating-point processing power0.7227 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs32no 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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedmedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount1 GBno data
Memory bus width64 Bit64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan1.1.126-
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GeForce 825M 2.03
+34.4%
R6 (Carrizo) 1.51

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

GeForce 825M 1757
+22.2%
R6 (Carrizo) 1438

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GeForce 825M 6000
+24.2%
R6 (Carrizo) 4830

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GeForce 825M 1150
+26.5%
R6 (Carrizo) 909

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

GeForce 825M 7416
+57.2%
R6 (Carrizo) 4717

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 HD31
+182%
11
−182%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+9.1%
30−35
−9.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
−16.7%
14
+16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+9.1%
30−35
−9.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Hitman 3 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+20%
14−16
−20%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+9.1%
10−12
−9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+9.1%
30−35
−9.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how GeForce 825M and R6 (Carrizo) compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 825M is 182% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GeForce 825M is 100% faster.
  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R6 (Carrizo) is 17% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GeForce 825M is ahead in 37 tests (76%)
  • R6 (Carrizo) is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • there's a draw in 11 tests (22%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.03 1.51
Recency 27 January 2014 4 June 2015
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 12 Watt

GeForce 825M has a 34.4% higher aggregate performance score.

R6 (Carrizo), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 175% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 825M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R6 (Carrizo) in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 825M
GeForce 825M
AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo)
Radeon R6 (Carrizo)

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.8 4 votes

Rate GeForce 825M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 13 votes

Rate Radeon R6 (Carrizo) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.