GeForce 920M vs Radeon PRO W7500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon PRO W7500 with GeForce 920M, including specs and performance data.

PRO W7500
2023
8 GB GDDR6, 70 Watt
31.89
+1765%

PRO W7500 outperforms 920M by a whopping 1765% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking182958
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation39.18no data
Power efficiency34.713.95
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameNavi 33GK208B
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date3 August 2023 (2 years ago)13 March 2015 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$429 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores1792384
Core clock speed1500 MHz954 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHzno data
Number of transistors13,300 million915 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rate190.430.53
Floating-point processing power12.19 TFLOPS0.7327 TFLOPS
ROPs648
TMUs11232
Ray Tracing Cores28no data

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 supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x8
Length216 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR6DDR3
Maximum RAM amount8 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1344 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth172.0 GB/s14.4 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 2.1No outputs

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boostno data2.0
Optimus-+
GameWorks-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.75.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.21.2
Vulkan1.31.1.126
CUDA-+

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.

PRO W7500 31.89
+1765%
GeForce 920M 1.71

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.

PRO W7500 13362
+1764%
GeForce 920M 717

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 HD300−350
+1665%
17
−1665%
4K160−170
+1678%
9
−1678%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.43no data
4K2.68no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
God of War 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Fortnite 29
+0%
29
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+0%
16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
God of War 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 15
+0%
15
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
God of War 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6
+0%
6
+0%
Metro Exodus 2
+0%
2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
+0%
7
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 25
+0%
25
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
God of War 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
+0%
4
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
God of War 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
God of War 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how PRO W7500 and GeForce 920M compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7500 is 1665% faster in 1080p
  • PRO W7500 is 1678% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 53 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 31.89 1.71
Recency 3 August 2023 13 March 2015
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 6 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 70 Watt 33 Watt

PRO W7500 has a 1764.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 920M, on the other hand, has 112.1% lower power consumption.

The Radeon PRO W7500 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 920M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon PRO W7500 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce 920M is a notebook one.

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 PRO W7500
Radeon PRO W7500
NVIDIA GeForce 920M
GeForce 920M

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.


4.1 22 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 1454 votes

Rate GeForce 920M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon PRO W7500 or GeForce 920M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.