Radeon 520 vs HD 7660G

Place in performance ranking	1006	837
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Value for money	0.01	2.00
Architecture	Terascale 3 (2010−2013)	GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code name	Trinity	Oland
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	15 May 2012 (11 years old)	21 March 2017 (7 years old)
Current price	$950	$140

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Radeon 520 has 19900% better value for money than HD 7660G.

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	384	320
Core clock speed	497 MHz	1030 MHz
Boost clock speed	686 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1.3 Million	1,040 million
Manufacturing process technology	32 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	50 Watt
Texture fill rate	16.46	20.60
Floating-point performance	no data	659.2 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on Radeon HD 7660G and Radeon 520 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Interface	IGP	PCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

Memory

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	no data	DDR3, GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	2 GB
Memory bus width	no data	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	16 GB/s
Shared memory	+	-

Video outputs and ports

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	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI	no data	+

API support

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

DirectX	11.2 (11_0)	12.0
Shader Model	5.0	5.0
OpenGL	4.4	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

HD 7660G 1.22

Radeon 520 2.03
+66.4%

520 outperforms HD 7660G by 66% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

HD 7660G 474

Radeon 520 787
+66%

520 outperforms HD 7660G by 66% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

HD 7660G 4523

Radeon 520 5266
+16.4%

520 outperforms HD 7660G by 16% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

HD 7660G 1057

Radeon 520 2017
+90.8%

520 outperforms HD 7660G by 91% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

HD 7660G 6409

Radeon 520 8413
+31.3%

520 outperforms HD 7660G by 31% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

HD 7660G 65558

Radeon 520 77543
+18.3%

520 outperforms HD 7660G by 18% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

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:

900p	10 −60%	16−18 +60%
Full HD	15 +0%	15 +0%
1200p	9 −55.6%	14−16 +55.6%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−25%

5−6
+25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −22.2%	10−12 +22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	4−5
Hitman 3	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −22.2%	10−12 +22.2%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	4−5
Hitman 3	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −14.3%	8−9 +14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −150%	10 +150%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	4−5
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −50%	6 +50%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Hitman 3	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	1−2
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

This is how HD 7660G and Radeon 520 compete in popular games:

900p resolution:

Radeon 520 is 60% faster than HD 7660G

1080p resolution:

Radeon 520 is 0% faster than HD 7660G

1200p resolution:

Radeon 520 is 55.6% faster than HD 7660G

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

in Hitman 3, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 520 is 200% faster than the HD 7660G.

All in all, in popular games:

Radeon 520 is ahead in 22 tests (76%)
there's a draw in 7 tests (24%)

Advantages and disadvantages

Performance score	1.22	2.03
Recency	15 May 2012	21 March 2017
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	2 GB
Chip lithography	32 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	35 Watt	50 Watt