Radeon Graphics vs HD 7310

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7310 and Radeon Graphics, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 7310
2012
18 Watt
0.33

Graphics outperforms HD 7310 by a whopping 500% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1315908
Place by popularitynot in top-10011
Power efficiency1.269.05
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameLovelandRenoir
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date6 June 2012 (12 years ago)no data

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 cores80448
Core clock speed500 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1500 MHz
Number of transistors450 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate4.00042.00
Floating-point processing power0.08 TFLOPS1.344 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs828

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).

InterfaceIGPIGP
WidthIGPIGP

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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
Shared memory+no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.2no data
VulkanN/A-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

HD 7310 0.33
Radeon Graphics 1.98
+500%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.

HD 7310 128
Radeon Graphics 764
+497%

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 Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
Valorant 24−27
−477%
150−160
+477%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
−477%
75−80
+477%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Dota 2 10−11
−500%
60−65
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Valorant 24−27
−477%
150−160
+477%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Dota 2 10−11
−500%
60−65
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Valorant 24−27
−477%
150−160
+477%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−500%
90−95
+500%
Valorant 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.33 1.98
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 15 Watt

Graphics has a 500% higher aggregate performance score, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Graphics is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7310 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon HD 7310
Radeon HD 7310
AMD Radeon Graphics
Radeon Graphics

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.7 172 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 6930 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 7310 or Radeon Graphics, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.