Radeon RX Vega 9 vs 625
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon 625 and Radeon RX Vega 9, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RX Vega 9 outperforms 625 by an impressive 95% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 792 | 604 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.96 | 25.74 |
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) | Vega (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 24 | Vega Raven Ridge |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 13 May 2019 (5 years ago) | 26 October 2017 (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 | 384 | 576 |
| Core clock speed | 730 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 1024 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,550 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 24.58 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.7864 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | no data |
| TMUs | 24 | 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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | no data |
| 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 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 | No outputs | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 12_1 |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | no data |
| Vulkan | 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.
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 | 8−9
−100%
| 16
+100%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 9−10
−66.7%
|
14−16
+66.7%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−275%
|
14−16
+275%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 7−8
−129%
|
16−18
+129%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
−157%
|
35−40
+157%
|
| Hitman 3 | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
−59.1%
|
35−40
+59.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−600%
|
21
+600%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
−114%
|
14−16
+114%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12−14
−66.7%
|
20−22
+66.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
−28.9%
|
45−50
+28.9%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 9−10
−66.7%
|
14−16
+66.7%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5
−275%
|
14−16
+275%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 7−8
−129%
|
16−18
+129%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
−157%
|
35−40
+157%
|
| Hitman 3 | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
−59.1%
|
35−40
+59.1%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−433%
|
16
+433%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
−114%
|
14−16
+114%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12−14
−66.7%
|
20−22
+66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
−35.7%
|
18−20
+35.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
−28.9%
|
45−50
+28.9%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 9−10
−66.7%
|
14−16
+66.7%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
−500%
|
6−7
+500%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
−80%
|
9−10
+80%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−140%
|
12−14
+140%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
−157%
|
35−40
+157%
|
| Hitman 3 | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
−59.1%
|
35−40
+59.1%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 12−14
−66.7%
|
20−22
+66.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+75%
|
8
−75%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 35−40
−28.9%
|
45−50
+28.9%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
−114%
|
14−16
+114%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−120%
|
10−12
+120%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 4−5
−125%
|
9−10
+125%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| Hitman 3 | 8−9
−25%
|
10−11
+25%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 7−8
−71.4%
|
12−14
+71.4%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−150%
|
5−6
+150%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 16−18
−112%
|
35−40
+112%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
4K
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 0−1 | 2−3 |
4K
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Hitman 3 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
This is how Radeon 625 and RX Vega 9 compete in popular games:
- RX Vega 9 is 100% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Radeon 625 is 75% faster.
- in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX Vega 9 is 600% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Radeon 625 is ahead in 1 test (1%)
- RX Vega 9 is ahead in 59 tests (88%)
- there's a draw in 7 tests (10%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.84 | 5.54 |
| Recency | 13 May 2019 | 26 October 2017 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 15 Watt |
Radeon 625 has an age advantage of 1 year.
RX Vega 9, on the other hand, has a 95.1% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX Vega 9 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 625 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
