Radeon 625 vs ATI Mobility HD 5165
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 5165 and Radeon 625, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
625 outperforms Mobility HD 5165 by a whopping 154% 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 | 1156 | 868 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.22 | 3.96 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) |
| GPU code name | M96 | Polaris 24 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (16 years ago) | 13 May 2019 (7 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 | 320 | 384 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 730 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1024 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 514 million | 1,550 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 19.20 | 24.58 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.384 TFLOPS | 0.7864 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 32 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 128 KB |
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 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 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 | GDDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 28.8 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 |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 12 (12_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2.131 |
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
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−550%
|
12−14
+550%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−85.7%
|
12−14
+85.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−44.4%
|
12−14
+44.4%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−41.9%
|
40−45
+41.9%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−100%
|
50−55
+100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−73.3%
|
24−27
+73.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
−550%
|
12−14
+550%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−85.7%
|
12−14
+85.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−44.4%
|
12−14
+44.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−41.9%
|
40−45
+41.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−73.3%
|
24−27
+73.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−85.7%
|
12−14
+85.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−44.4%
|
12−14
+44.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−41.9%
|
40−45
+41.9%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−550%
|
12−14
+550%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7
−217%
|
18−20
+217%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−118%
|
24−27
+118%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−7.1%
|
14−16
+7.1%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
−160%
|
12−14
+160%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 625 is 550% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Radeon 625 performs better in 38 tests (76%)
- there's a draw in 12 tests (24%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.01 | 2.57 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 13 May 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 50 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 5165 has 43% lower power consumption.
Radeon 625, on the other hand, has a 154% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon 625 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 5165 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.
