Mobility Radeon HD 5650 vs GeForce GT 520
Aggregated performance score
Mobility Radeon HD 5650 outperforms GeForce GT 520 by 71% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 1101 | 968 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 0.01 | no data |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | GF119 | Madison Pro |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 13 April 2011 (13 years ago) | 7 January 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $59 | no data |
| Current price | $88 (1.5x MSRP) | $24 |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 48 | 400 |
| CUDA cores | 48 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 810 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 650 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 292 million | 627 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 29 Watt | 15-19 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 102 °C | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 6.5 billion/sec | 9.000 |
| Floating-point performance | 155.52 gflops | 360.0 gflops |
Size and compatibility
Information on GeForce GT 520 and Mobility Radeon HD 5650 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Bus support | 16x PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | no data |
| Height | 2.7" (6.9 cm) | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
Memory
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 | DDR3 | GDDR3, DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB (DDR3) | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz (DDR3) | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
| Shared memory | no data | - |
Video outputs and ports
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 Connectors | Dual Link DVI-IHDMIVGA (optional) | No outputs |
| Multi monitor support | + | no data |
| HDMI | + | no data |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.2 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance 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.
Mobility Radeon HD 5650 outperforms GeForce GT 520 by 71% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
Mobility Radeon HD 5650 outperforms GeForce GT 520 by 92% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
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:
| 900p | 8−9
−87.5%
| 15
+87.5%
|
| Full HD | 9−10
−77.8%
| 16
+77.8%
|
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 0.80 | 1.37 |
| Recency | 13 April 2011 | 7 January 2010 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 29 Watt | 15 Watt |
The Mobility Radeon HD 5650 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 520 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GT 520 is a desktop card while Mobility Radeon HD 5650 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
