Radeon Pro Vega 48 vs HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics with Radeon Pro Vega 48, including specs and performance data.
Pro Vega 48 outperforms HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics by a whopping 1286% 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 | 918 | 232 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | no data | Vega 10 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 15 May 2012 (13 years ago) | 19 March 2019 (6 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 | 862 | 3072 |
| Core clock speed | 685 / 600 MHz | 1200 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1300 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 12,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 249.6 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 7.987 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 64 |
| TMUs | no data | 192 |
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 | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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,GDDR5 | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 2048 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 786 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 402.4 GB/s |
| 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 data | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.1.125 |
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 | 19
−1268%
| 260−270
+1268%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1200%
|
65−70
+1200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Fortnite | 9−10
−1233%
|
120−130
+1233%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1200%
|
130−140
+1200%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1264%
|
150−160
+1264%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1216%
|
500−550
+1216%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1200%
|
65−70
+1200%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 40−45
−1275%
|
550−600
+1275%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−1264%
|
300−310
+1264%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Fortnite | 9−10
−1233%
|
120−130
+1233%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1200%
|
130−140
+1200%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1264%
|
150−160
+1264%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1275%
|
110−120
+1275%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1216%
|
500−550
+1216%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1200%
|
65−70
+1200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−1264%
|
300−310
+1264%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1200%
|
130−140
+1200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−1264%
|
150−160
+1264%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1275%
|
110−120
+1275%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−1216%
|
500−550
+1216%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 9−10
−1233%
|
120−130
+1233%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−1257%
|
190−200
+1257%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 20−22
−1250%
|
270−280
+1250%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
−1233%
|
200−210
+1233%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
| Dead Island 2 | 5−6
−1200%
|
65−70
+1200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−1200%
|
65−70
+1200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−1250%
|
27−30
+1250%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dead Island 2 | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−1275%
|
220−230
+1275%
|
| Valorant | 10−11
−1200%
|
130−140
+1200%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dead Island 2 | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−1275%
|
55−60
+1275%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
−1233%
|
40−45
+1233%
|
This is how HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics and Pro Vega 48 compete in popular games:
- Pro Vega 48 is 1268% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.97 | 27.31 |
| Recency | 15 May 2012 | 19 March 2019 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
Pro Vega 48 has a 1286.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 128.6% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Pro Vega 48 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 7660G + HD 7670M Dual Graphics is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro Vega 48 is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
