GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB vs Radeon 625
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon 625 and GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
1050 Mobile 3 GB outperforms 625 by a whopping 344% 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 | 858 | 452 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.95 | 11.70 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 24 | GP107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 13 May 2019 (6 years ago) | 1 February 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 | 384 | 768 |
| Core clock speed | 730 MHz | 1366 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1024 MHz | 1442 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,550 million | 3,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 24.58 | 69.22 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.7864 TFLOPS | 2.215 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 24 |
| TMUs | 24 | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 96 KB | 288 KB |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | 768 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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 96 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 1752 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 84.1 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 | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 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.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−329%
|
30−33
+329%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−320%
|
21−24
+320%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−338%
|
35−40
+338%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−329%
|
30−33
+329%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−320%
|
21−24
+320%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−329%
|
30−33
+329%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−323%
|
55−60
+323%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−323%
|
55−60
+323%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−323%
|
55−60
+323%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−332%
|
190−200
+332%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−338%
|
35−40
+338%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−329%
|
30−33
+329%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 50−55
−340%
|
220−230
+340%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−320%
|
21−24
+320%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
−323%
|
110−120
+323%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−329%
|
30−33
+329%
|
| Fortnite | 12−14
−323%
|
55−60
+323%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−323%
|
55−60
+323%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−323%
|
55−60
+323%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−332%
|
190−200
+332%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 8−9
−338%
|
35−40
+338%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−320%
|
21−24
+320%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
−323%
|
110−120
+323%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8
−329%
|
30−33
+329%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
−323%
|
55−60
+323%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−323%
|
55−60
+323%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−289%
|
35−40
+289%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−332%
|
190−200
+332%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 12−14
−323%
|
55−60
+323%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 18−20
−321%
|
80−85
+321%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
−317%
|
100−105
+317%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−335%
|
100−105
+335%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 5−6
−320%
|
21−24
+320%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−300%
|
24−27
+300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−300%
|
16−18
+300%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6
−320%
|
21−24
+320%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−333%
|
65−70
+333%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−323%
|
55−60
+323%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 7−8
−329%
|
30−33
+329%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−300%
|
8−9
+300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.55 | 11.32 |
| Recency | 13 May 2019 | 1 February 2019 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 3 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 75 Watt |
Radeon 625 has an age advantage of 3 months, and 50% lower power consumption.
GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB, on the other hand, has a 343.9% higher aggregate performance score, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB 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.
