ATI Radeon E4690 vs HD 7520G

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 7520G with Radeon E4690, including specs and performance data.

HD 7520G
2012
35 Watt
0.76

E4690 outperforms HD 7520G by a significant 28% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12181166
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.672.49
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameScrapperRV730
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date6 June 2012 (13 years ago)1 June 2009 (16 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 cores192320
Core clock speed496 MHz600 MHz
Boost clock speed685 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,303 million514 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate8.22019.20
Floating-point processing power0.263 TFLOPSno data
ROPs48
TMUs1232

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceIGPMXM-II
Widthno dataMXM Module

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 SharedGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared512 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1400 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data22.4 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)10.1
Shader Model5.04.1
OpenGL4.43.3
OpenCL1.21.0
VulkanN/A-

Synthetic benchmarks

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 7520G 0.76
ATI E4690 0.97
+27.6%

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 7520G 316
Samples: 665
ATI E4690 405
+28.2%
Samples: 3

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 HD28
−25%
35−40
+25%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
Valorant 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21−24
−14.3%
24−27
+14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Valorant 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Valorant 27−30
−20.7%
35−40
+20.7%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−25%
10−11
+25%

1440p
Ultra

Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Valorant 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how HD 7520G and ATI E4690 compete in popular games:

  • ATI E4690 is 25% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.76 0.97
Recency 6 June 2012 1 June 2009
Chip lithography 32 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 30 Watt

HD 7520G has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 72% more advanced lithography process.

ATI E4690, on the other hand, has a 28% higher aggregate performance score, and 17% lower power consumption.

The Radeon E4690 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7520G in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7520G is a notebook graphics card while Radeon E4690 is a desktop one.

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.


2.9 108 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7520G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Radeon E4690 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 7520G or Radeon E4690, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.