UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) vs Radeon 625

Place in the ranking	798	897
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	Gen. 11 (2021)
GPU code name	Polaris 24	Gen. 11
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	13 May 2019 (5 years ago)	11 January 2021 (3 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	32
Core clock speed	730 MHz	350 MHz
Boost clock speed	1024 MHz	900 MHz
Number of transistors	1,550 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	4.8 - 10 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

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Sync

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

10−12
+25%

−25%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6
+25%

4−5

−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +29.4%	16−18 −29.4%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +8.6%	35−40 −8.6%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +29.4%	16−18 −29.4%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +33.3%	9 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +16.7%	12−14 −16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +8.6%	35−40 −8.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Far Cry 5	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +75%	8−9 −75%
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +267%	6 −267%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 −8.3%	13 +8.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +367%	3 −367%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +8.6%	35−40 −8.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8
+75%

4−5

−75%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 +54.5%	10−12 −54.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+20%

5−6

−20%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

This is how Radeon 625 and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) compete in popular games:

Radeon 625 is 25% 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 367% faster.
in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is 8% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Radeon 625 is ahead in 47 tests (89%)
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 5 tests (9%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.79	1.99
Recency	13 May 2019	11 January 2021
Chip lithography	28 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	4 Watt

Radeon 625 has a 40.2% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 1150% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 625 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 32 EU) in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.