HD Graphics 620 vs Radeon HD 7950

Place in the ranking	399	837
Place by popularity	not in top-100	63
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.39	no data
Power efficiency	4.29	11.21
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	Tahiti	Kaby Lake GT2
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	31 January 2012 (12 years ago)	30 August 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	1792	192
Compute units	28	no data
Core clock speed	no data	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	1250 MHz	1000 MHz
Number of transistors	4,313 million	189 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	14 nm++
Power consumption (TDP)	200 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	89.60	24.00
Floating-point processing power	2.867 TFLOPS	0.384 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	3
TMUs	112	24

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).

Bus support	PCIe 3.0 x16	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	Ring Bus
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	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	GDDR5	DDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	32 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	240 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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort	Portable Device Dependent
Eyefinity	+	-
Number of Eyefinity displays	6	no data
HDMI	+	-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration	+	-
CrossFire	+	-
FreeSync	+	-
PowerTune	+	-
ZeroCore	+	-
Quick Sync	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 11	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	5.1	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	3.0
Vulkan	-	+

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

HD 7950 12.35
+410%

HD Graphics 620 2.42

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 7950 4764
+410%

HD Graphics 620 935

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 7950 7500
+703%

HD Graphics 620 934

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

65−70
+400%

−400%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

6.91

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

5−6

+0%

5−6

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	6 +0%	6 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	25 +0%	25 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	14 +0%	14 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Battlefield 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Metro Exodus	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	15 +0%	15 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

+0%

5−6

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6

+0%

5−6

+0%

4K
High Preset

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

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%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

This is how HD 7950 and HD Graphics 620 compete in popular games:

HD 7950 is 400% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 56 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	12.35	2.42
Recency	31 January 2012	30 August 2016
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	32 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	200 Watt	15 Watt

HD 7950 has a 410.3% higher aggregate performance score.

HD Graphics 620, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 966.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 1233.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 7950 is our recommended choice as it beats the HD Graphics 620 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7950 is a desktop card while HD Graphics 620 is a notebook one.

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