Radeon R7 M520 vs GeForce FX 5900 Ultra

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1446not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.13no data
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameNV35Oland
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date23 October 2003 (21 year ago)18 April 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 coresno data320
Core clock speed450 MHz1030 MHz
Number of transistors135 million1,040 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)59 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate3.60020.60
ROPs48
TMUs820

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).

InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 3.0 x8
Length218 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x MolexNone

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 typeDDRDDR3
Maximum RAM amount256 MB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed425 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth27.2 GB/s16 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0a12.0
Shader Modelno data5.0
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)4.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 October 2003 18 April 2017
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 59 Watt 50 Watt

R7 M520 has an age advantage of 13 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 18% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce FX 5900 Ultra and Radeon R7 M520. We've got no test results to judge.


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 FX 5900 Ultra
GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
AMD Radeon R7 M520
Radeon R7 M520

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.


3.5 6 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5900 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 16 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M520 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.