Radeon Vega 7 vs P106-090

Place in the ranking	626	588
Place by popularity	not in top-100	15
Power efficiency	5.83	11.40
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GP106	Cezanne
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	31 July 2017 (8 years ago)	13 April 2021 (4 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	768	448
Core clock speed	1354 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	1531 MHz	1900 MHz
Number of transistors	4,400 million	9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	73.49	53.20
Floating-point processing power	2.352 TFLOPS	1.702 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	8
TMUs	48	28

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).

Interface	PCIe 1.0 x1	IGP
Length	250 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	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	GDDR5	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	192 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	2002 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	192.2 GB/s	no data
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

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	6.8	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	3.0	2.1
Vulkan	1.3	1.2
CUDA	6.1	-

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	18−20 −27.8%	23 +27.8%
1440p	21−24 −33.3%	28 +33.3%
4K	14−16 −28.6%	18 +28.6%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	18 +0%	18 +0%
God of War	14 +0%	14 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	28 +0%	28 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14 +0%	14 +0%
Far Cry 5	20 +0%	20 +0%
Fortnite	63 +0%	63 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	37 +0%	37 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	24 +0%	24 +0%
God of War	12 +0%	12 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	23 +0%	23 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	58 +0%	58 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	10 +0%	10 +0%
Far Cry 5	18 +0%	18 +0%
Fortnite	27 +0%	27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35 +0%	35 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	21 +0%	21 +0%
God of War	9 +0%	9 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	17 +0%	17 +0%
Metro Exodus	13 +0%	13 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	23 +0%	23 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	19 +0%	19 +0%
Valorant	73 +0%	73 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21 +0%	21 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 +0%	9 +0%
Far Cry 5	18 +0%	18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	27 +0%	27 +0%
God of War	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13 +0%	13 +0%
Valorant	25 +0%	25 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Metro Exodus	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Valorant	48 +0%	48 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
God of War	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite

14−16

+0%

14−16

+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Valorant	25 +0%	25 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
God of War	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite

7−8

+0%

7−8

+0%

This is how P106-090 and Vega 7 compete in popular games:

Vega 7 is 28% faster in 1080p
Vega 7 is 33% faster in 1440p
Vega 7 is 29% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.74	6.73
Recency	31 July 2017	13 April 2021
Chip lithography	16 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	45 Watt

Vega 7 has a 17.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Vega 7 is our recommended choice as it beats the P106-090 in performance tests.

Be aware that P106-090 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon Vega 7 is a notebook one.