Radeon 625 vs GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile and Radeon 625, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 2080 Mobile outperforms 625 by a whopping 1322% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 143 | 840 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 18.45 | 3.89 |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | TU104B | Polaris 24 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 29 January 2019 (6 years ago) | 13 May 2019 (6 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 | 2944 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 1380 MHz | 730 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1590 MHz | 1024 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 13,600 million | 1,550 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 292.6 | 24.58 |
| Floating-point processing power | 9.362 TFLOPS | 0.7864 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 8 |
| TMUs | 184 | 24 |
| Tensor Cores | 368 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 46 | 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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | GDDR6 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 14000 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 384.0 GB/s | 14.4 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| VR Ready | + | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | 7.5 | - |
| DLSS | + | - |
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 | 142
+1478%
| 9−10
−1478%
|
| 1440p | 94
+1467%
| 6−7
−1467%
|
| 4K | 65
+1525%
| 4−5
−1525%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+2843%
|
7−8
−2843%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+1600%
|
5−6
−1600%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 75−80
+7700%
|
1−2
−7700%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 132
+1550%
|
8−9
−1550%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+2843%
|
7−8
−2843%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+1600%
|
5−6
−1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 104
+1386%
|
7−8
−1386%
|
| Fortnite | 206
+1485%
|
12−14
−1485%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 147
+1031%
|
12−14
−1031%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+2200%
|
5−6
−2200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 243
+1769%
|
12−14
−1769%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 75−80
+7700%
|
1−2
−7700%
|
| Valorant | 276
+542%
|
40−45
−542%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 118
+1375%
|
8−9
−1375%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 200−210
+2843%
|
7−8
−2843%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+456%
|
50−55
−456%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+1600%
|
5−6
−1600%
|
| Dota 2 | 131
+404%
|
24−27
−404%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 97
+1286%
|
7−8
−1286%
|
| Fortnite | 169
+1200%
|
12−14
−1200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 145
+1015%
|
12−14
−1015%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+2200%
|
5−6
−2200%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 101
+1583%
|
6−7
−1583%
|
| Metro Exodus | 90
+1700%
|
5−6
−1700%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 214
+1546%
|
12−14
−1546%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 75−80
+7700%
|
1−2
−7700%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 174
+1833%
|
9−10
−1833%
|
| Valorant | 266
+519%
|
40−45
−519%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 117
+1363%
|
8−9
−1363%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 85−90
+1600%
|
5−6
−1600%
|
| Dota 2 | 125
+381%
|
24−27
−381%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 96
+1271%
|
7−8
−1271%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 139
+969%
|
12−14
−969%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 174
+1238%
|
12−14
−1238%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 75−80
+7700%
|
1−2
−7700%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 95
+956%
|
9−10
−956%
|
| Valorant | 205
+377%
|
40−45
−377%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 155
+1092%
|
12−14
−1092%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+2200%
|
4−5
−2200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 250−260
+1247%
|
18−20
−1247%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 70−75
+7300%
|
1−2
−7300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55
+5400%
|
1−2
−5400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+629%
|
24−27
−629%
|
| Valorant | 260
+1030%
|
21−24
−1030%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 115
+1338%
|
8−9
−1338%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+4100%
|
1−2
−4100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 82
+2633%
|
3−4
−2633%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 122
+1933%
|
6−7
−1933%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 55−60
+1767%
|
3−4
−1767%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+3350%
|
2−3
−3350%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 124
+2380%
|
5−6
−2380%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 75−80
+420%
|
14−16
−420%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65
+1525%
|
4−5
−1525%
|
| Valorant | 240
+1746%
|
12−14
−1746%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 68
+1600%
|
4−5
−1600%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+2000%
|
2−3
−2000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 119
+1600%
|
7−8
−1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 52
+5100%
|
1−2
−5100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 82
+4000%
|
2−3
−4000%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 61
+1933%
|
3−4
−1933%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 30−35 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 61
+1933%
|
3−4
−1933%
|
This is how RTX 2080 Mobile and Radeon 625 compete in popular games:
- RTX 2080 Mobile is 1478% faster in 1080p
- RTX 2080 Mobile is 1467% faster in 1440p
- RTX 2080 Mobile is 1525% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Sons of the Forest, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the RTX 2080 Mobile is 7700% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RTX 2080 Mobile surpassed Radeon 625 in all 56 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 36.40 | 2.56 |
| Recency | 29 January 2019 | 13 May 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 50 Watt |
RTX 2080 Mobile has a 1321.9% higher aggregate performance score, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.
Radeon 625, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 months, and 200% lower power consumption.
The GeForce RTX 2080 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 625 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
