GeForce GT 710 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Aggregated performance score
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms GeForce GT 710 by 175% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 618 | 903 |
| Place by popularity | 50 | 52 |
| Value for money | no data | 0.04 |
| Architecture | Vega (2017−2021) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | Vega Raven Ridge | GK208B |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 26 October 2017 (6 years old) | 27 March 2014 (10 years old) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $34.99 |
| Current price | no data | $81 (2.3x MSRP) |
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 | 512 | 192 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 192 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 954 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1200 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 915 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 19 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 15.26 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 366.3 gflops |
Size and compatibility
Information on Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and GeForce GT 710 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.
| Bus support | no data | PCI Express 2.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x8 |
| Length | no data | 5.7" (14.5 cm) |
| Height | no data | 2.713" (6.9 cm) |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | no data | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 1.8 GB/s |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 14.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 | no data | Dual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA |
| Multi monitor support | no data | 3 displays |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| HDCP | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | Internal |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| 3D Vision | no data | + |
| PureVideo | no data | + |
| PhysX | no data | + |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | no data | 1.1.126 |
| 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.
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms GeForce GT 710 by 175% 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%
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms GeForce GT 710 by 151% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms GeForce GT 710 by 117% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.
3DMark Ice Storm GPU
Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.
Benchmark coverage: 8%
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms GeForce GT 710 by 61% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.
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 | 18
+125%
| 8
−125%
|
| 1440p | 8−9
+167%
| 3
−167%
|
| 4K | 10
+42.9%
| 7
−42.9%
|
Performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 15
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 10
+233%
|
3−4
−233%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 24
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 16
+60%
|
10−11
−60%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12
+140%
|
5
−140%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 13
+160%
|
5
−160%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 26
+1200%
|
2−3
−1200%
|
| Hitman 3 | 10−11
+100%
|
5
−100%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 12
+500%
|
2−3
−500%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12
+200%
|
4−5
−200%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12
+71.4%
|
7−8
−71.4%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 12
+200%
|
4−5
−200%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 11
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 22
+2100%
|
1−2
−2100%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 6
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10
+150%
|
4
−150%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 14
+180%
|
5
−180%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30
+1400%
|
2−3
−1400%
|
| Hitman 3 | 10−11
+400%
|
2−3
−400%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7
+133%
|
3
−133%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 13
+160%
|
5
−160%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 8
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 23
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9
+125%
|
4
−125%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 14
+180%
|
5−6
−180%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 23
+1050%
|
2−3
−1050%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8
+167%
|
3
−167%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| Hitman 3 | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Hitman 3 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 3
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 4 | 0−1 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Battlefield 5 | 6
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and GT 710 compete in popular games:
1080p resolution:
- RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 125% faster than GT 710
1440p resolution:
- RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 167% faster than GT 710
4K resolution:
- RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 42.9% faster than GT 710
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 2300% faster than the GT 710.
- in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 710 is 66.7% faster than the RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000).
All in all, in popular games:
- RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is ahead in 42 tests (98%)
- GT 710 is ahead in 1 test (2%)
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 4.48 | 1.63 |
| Recency | 26 October 2017 | 27 March 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 19 Watt |
The Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 710 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while GeForce GT 710 is a desktop 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.
