Radeon 820M vs GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile and Radeon 820M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 5050 Mobile outperforms 820M by a whopping 3128% 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 | 99 | 1047 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 63.35 | no data |
| Architecture | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) | RDNA 3+ (2024) |
| GPU code name | GB207 | Krackan Point |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 24 June 2025 (recently) | 2 June 2024 (1 year 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 | 2560 | 128 |
| Core clock speed | 2235 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2520 MHz | 2900 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 201.6 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 12.9 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 32 | no data |
| TMUs | 80 | no data |
| Tensor Cores | 80 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 20 | 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 | medium sized | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 5.0 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 | GDDR6 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 7500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 224.0 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
| Resizable BAR | + | + |
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 | Portable Device Dependent | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | no data |
| Shader Model | 6.8 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.4 | - |
| CUDA | 12.0 | - |
| DLSS | + | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 230−240
+3271%
|
7−8
−3271%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 100−110
+3300%
|
3−4
−3300%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 90−95
+4400%
|
2−3
−4400%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 140−150
+3425%
|
4−5
−3425%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 230−240
+3271%
|
7−8
−3271%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 100−110
+3300%
|
3−4
−3300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 130−140
+3350%
|
4−5
−3350%
|
| Fortnite | 180−190
+3600%
|
5−6
−3600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 160−170
+3220%
|
5−6
−3220%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 130−140
+13300%
|
1−2
−13300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170
+1722%
|
9−10
−1722%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 90−95
+4400%
|
2−3
−4400%
|
| Valorant | 240−250
+3386%
|
7−8
−3386%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 140−150
+3425%
|
4−5
−3425%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 230−240
+3271%
|
7−8
−3271%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 270−280
+823%
|
30−33
−823%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 100−110
+3300%
|
3−4
−3300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 130−140
+3350%
|
4−5
−3350%
|
| Fortnite | 180−190
+3600%
|
5−6
−3600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 160−170
+3220%
|
5−6
−3220%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 130−140
+13300%
|
1−2
−13300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 130−140
+13600%
|
1−2
−13600%
|
| Metro Exodus | 100−110
+5150%
|
2−3
−5150%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170
+1722%
|
9−10
−1722%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 90−95
+4400%
|
2−3
−4400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 150−160
+2171%
|
7−8
−2171%
|
| Valorant | 240−250
+3386%
|
7−8
−3386%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 140−150
+3425%
|
4−5
−3425%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 100−110
+3300%
|
3−4
−3300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 130−140
+3350%
|
4−5
−3350%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 160−170
+3220%
|
5−6
−3220%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170
+1722%
|
9−10
−1722%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 90−95
+4400%
|
2−3
−4400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 150−160
+2171%
|
7−8
−2171%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 180−190
+3600%
|
5−6
−3600%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 110−120
+5600%
|
2−3
−5600%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 300−350
+3675%
|
8−9
−3675%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 85−90
+4350%
|
2−3
−4350%
|
| Metro Exodus | 65−70
+3150%
|
2−3
−3150%
|
| Valorant | 270−280
+3338%
|
8−9
−3338%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 100−110
+3500%
|
3−4
−3500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 50−55 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 100−110
+3433%
|
3−4
−3433%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 120−130
+4133%
|
3−4
−4133%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 65−70
+3300%
|
2−3
−3300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 85−90
+8500%
|
1−2
−8500%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 110−120
+3800%
|
3−4
−3800%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 50−55
+5100%
|
1−2
−5100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 95−100
+540%
|
14−16
−540%
|
| Metro Exodus | 40−45
+3900%
|
1−2
−3900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 70−75
+3450%
|
2−3
−3450%
|
| Valorant | 260−270
+3163%
|
8−9
−3163%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 70−75
+3400%
|
2−3
−3400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 55−60
+5800%
|
1−2
−5800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 85−90
+4200%
|
2−3
−4200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+3050%
|
2−3
−3050%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 40−45
+4000%
|
1−2
−4000%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 55−60
+5800%
|
1−2
−5800%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 5050 Mobile is 13600% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RTX 5050 Mobile surpassed Radeon 820M in all 19 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 40.67 | 1.26 |
| Recency | 24 June 2025 | 2 June 2024 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 4 nm |
RTX 5050 Mobile has a 3127.8% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 1 year.
Radeon 820M, on the other hand, has a 25% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 820M 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.
