UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs vs GeForce GT 520MX

Place in the ranking	1167	657
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	2.51	11.24
Architecture	Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)	Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)
GPU code name	GF119	Tiger Lake Xe
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	30 May 2011 (13 years ago)	15 August 2020 (4 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 cores	48	48
Core clock speed	900 MHz	350 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1450 MHz
Number of transistors	292 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	28 Watt
Texture fill rate	7.200	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.1728 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	4	no data
TMUs	8	no 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).

Interface

PCIe 2.0 x16

no 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 type	DDR3	no data
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	no data
Memory bus width	64 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	no data
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	no 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 Connectors

No outputs

no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus	+	-
Quick Sync	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	12_1
Shader Model	5.1	no data
OpenGL	4.5	no data
OpenCL	1.1	no data
Vulkan	N/A	-
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.

GT 520MX 0.73

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 4.57
+526%

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.

GT 520MX 597

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 3510
+488%

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.

GT 520MX 2620

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs 10650
+307%

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

2−3

−750%

17
+750%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −267%	11 +267%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −200%	21 +200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −180%	14−16 +180%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −175%	22 +175%
Fortnite	1−2 −2600%	27−30 +2600%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −143%	17 +143%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−11 −290%	35−40 +290%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 −180%	14−16 +180%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 −150%	14−16 +150%
World of Tanks	18−20 −31.6%	25 +31.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −33.3%	12−14 +33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −200%	9−10 +200%
Far Cry 5	8−9 −75%	14 +75%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 −129%	16 +129%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	10−11 −290%	35−40 +290%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 −675%	30−35 +675%
World of Tanks	3−4 −1000%	30−35 +1000%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −150%	10−11 +150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −200%	6−7 +200%
Valorant	5−6 −160%	12−14 +160%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −13.3%	16−18 +13.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	2−3 −550%	12−14 +550%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −6.7%	16−18 +6.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Dota 2	14−16 −13.3%	16−18 +13.3%
Valorant	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%

Full HD
Low Preset

Elden Ring

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	17 +0%	17 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Dota 2	15 +0%	15 +0%
Elden Ring	10 +0%	10 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	10 +0%	10 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	12 +0%	12 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Dota 2	24 +0%	24 +0%
Valorant	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Elden Ring	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
High Preset

Elden Ring	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Metro Exodus	0−1	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Fortnite	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

This is how GT 520MX and UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs compete in popular games:

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 750% faster in 1080p

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

in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is 2600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is ahead in 33 tests (55%)
there's a draw in 27 tests (45%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.73	4.57
Recency	30 May 2011	15 August 2020
Chip lithography	40 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	20 Watt	28 Watt

GT 520MX has 40% lower power consumption.

UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs, on the other hand, has a 526% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 520MX in performance tests.

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