Radeon Pro V520 vs HD 6850M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6850M with Radeon Pro V520, including specs and performance data.
Pro V520 outperforms HD 6850M by a whopping 1466% 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 | 934 | 217 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.85 | 9.91 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) |
| GPU code name | Granville | Navi 12 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 4 January 2011 (14 years ago) | 1 December 2020 (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 | 800 | 2304 |
| Core clock speed | 675 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1600 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,040 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 225 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 27.00 | 230.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.08 TFLOPS | 7.373 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 64 |
| TMUs | 40 | 144 |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 4 MB |
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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | IGP |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 8-pin |
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 | GDDR3 | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 2048 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 512.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
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 | 20
−1400%
| 300−350
+1400%
|
| Full HD | 26
−1438%
| 400−450
+1438%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−1329%
|
100−105
+1329%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1400%
|
150−160
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−1329%
|
100−105
+1329%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1445%
|
170−180
+1445%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1347%
|
550−600
+1347%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
−1438%
|
600−650
+1438%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−1329%
|
300−310
+1329%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1400%
|
150−160
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−1329%
|
100−105
+1329%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1445%
|
170−180
+1445%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1347%
|
550−600
+1347%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−1329%
|
300−310
+1329%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1400%
|
150−160
+1400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 7−8
−1329%
|
100−105
+1329%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1445%
|
170−180
+1445%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1347%
|
550−600
+1347%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 8−9
−1400%
|
120−130
+1400%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−1438%
|
200−210
+1438%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−1456%
|
280−290
+1456%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−1438%
|
200−210
+1438%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1300%
|
14−16
+1300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−1400%
|
75−80
+1400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 2−3
−1400%
|
30−33
+1400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−1400%
|
30−33
+1400%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−1463%
|
250−260
+1463%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
−1456%
|
140−150
+1456%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−1400%
|
60−65
+1400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1400%
|
45−50
+1400%
|
This is how HD 6850M and Pro V520 compete in popular games:
- Pro V520 is 1400% faster in 900p
- Pro V520 is 1438% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.77 | 27.72 |
| Recency | 4 January 2011 | 1 December 2020 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 225 Watt |
HD 6850M has 350% lower power consumption.
Pro V520, on the other hand, has a 1466.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro V520 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6850M in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6850M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro V520 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
