Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) vs GeForce GTX 880M SLI

Place in the ranking	258	491
Place by popularity	not in top-100	28
Power efficiency	7.22	41.36
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Vega (2017−2020)
GPU code name	N15E-GX-A2	Vega
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	12 March 2014 (10 years ago)	7 January 2020 (5 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	3072	512
Core clock speed	954 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	2100 MHz
Number of transistors	2x 3540 Million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	206 Watt	15 Watt

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 size	large	no data
SLI options	+	-

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	GDDR5	no data
Maximum RAM amount	2x 8 GB	no data
Memory bus width	2x 256 Bit	no data
Memory clock speed	5000 MHz	no data
Shared memory	-	-

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.

DirectX	12 (FL 11_0)	12_1
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.

GTX 880M SLI 20.78
+140%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 8.67

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.

GTX 880M SLI 15823
+169%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 5891

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.

GTX 880M SLI 36366
+62.1%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 22428

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.

GTX 880M SLI 11817
+216%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 3743

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.

GTX 880M SLI 77057
+185%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 27084

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	77 +235%	23 −235%
1440p	40−45 +135%	17 −135%
4K	21−24 +133%	9 −133%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +200%	13 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +126%	19 −126%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +134%	27−30 −134%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +333%	9 −333%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +187%	15 −187%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +188%	32 −188%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +171%	21 −171%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +115%	27 −115%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 +48.5%	33 −48.5%
Valorant	85−90 +97.7%	44 −97.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +134%	27−30 −134%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +333%	9 −333%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +291%	11 −291%
Dota 2	75−80 +162%	29 −162%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +133%	30 −133%
Fortnite	110−120 +111%	50−55 −111%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +241%	27 −241%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +338%	13 −338%
Grand Theft Auto V	75−80 +295%	19 −295%
Metro Exodus	55−60 +205%	19 −205%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 +149%	57 −149%
Red Dead Redemption 2	45−50 +308%	12 −308%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	65−70 +156%	27−30 −156%
Valorant	85−90 +521%	14 −521%
World of Tanks	240−250 +402%	48 −402%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	65−70 +134%	27−30 −134%
Counter-Strike 2	35−40 +117%	18−20 −117%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +378%	9 −378%
Dota 2	75−80 +58.3%	48 −58.3%
Far Cry 5	70−75 +84.2%	35−40 −84.2%
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +300%	23 −300%
Forza Horizon 5	55−60 +307%	14 −307%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150 +100%	70−75 −100%
Valorant	85−90 +135%	37 −135%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	35−40 +289%	9 −289%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 +289%	9 −289%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +686%	22 −686%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +186%	7−8 −186%
World of Tanks	140−150 +590%	21 −590%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	40−45 +159%	16−18 −159%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +171%	7−8 −171%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +800%	2 −800%
Far Cry 5	60−65 +216%	18−20 −216%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +250%	16 −250%
Forza Horizon 5	30−35 +162%	12−14 −162%
Metro Exodus	45−50 +188%	17 −188%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +158%	12−14 −158%
Valorant	55−60 +46.2%	39 −46.2%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +46.2%	12−14 −46.2%
Dota 2	35−40 +270%	10 −270%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 +270%	10 −270%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +167%	6 −167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 +400%	13 −400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16 +133%	6−7 −133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40 +270%	10 −270%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +175%	8−9 −175%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +46.2%	12−14 −46.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Dota 2	35−40 +106%	18 −106%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +155%	10−12 −155%
Fortnite	24−27 +189%	9−10 −189%
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +267%	9 −267%
Forza Horizon 5	18−20 +200%	6−7 −200%
Valorant	27−30 +200%	9−10 −200%

This is how GTX 880M SLI and RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) compete in popular games:

GTX 880M SLI is 235% faster in 1080p
GTX 880M SLI is 135% faster in 1440p
GTX 880M SLI is 133% faster in 4K

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

in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 880M SLI is 800% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GTX 880M SLI surpassed RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) in all 64 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	20.78	8.67
Recency	12 March 2014	7 January 2020
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	206 Watt	15 Watt

GTX 880M SLI has a 139.7% higher aggregate performance score.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 1273.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 880M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) in performance tests.

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