Qualcomm Adreno 690 vs Radeon Pro 5300M

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro 5300M with Qualcomm Adreno 690, including specs and performance data.

Pro 5300M
2019
4 GB GDDR6, 85 Watt
13.33
+467%

Pro 5300M outperforms Qualcomm Adreno 690 by a whopping 467% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking356815
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency12.3926.52
ArchitectureRDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)no data
GPU code nameNavi 14no data
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date13 November 2019 (5 years ago)6 December 2018 (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 cores1280no data
Core clock speed1000 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1250 MHzno data
Number of transistors6,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology7 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)85 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate100.0no data
Floating-point processing power3.2 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs80no 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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 4.0 x8no 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 typeGDDR6no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1500 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+
Resizable BAR+-

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 data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12
Shader Model6.5no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-

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 5300M 13.33
+467%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 2.35

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 5300M 5955
+467%
Qualcomm Adreno 690 1050

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 HD120−130
+445%
22
−445%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+429%
7−8
−429%
Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+1267%
6−7
−1267%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+500%
5−6
−500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+429%
7−8
−429%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+688%
8−9
−688%
Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+1267%
6−7
−1267%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+500%
5−6
−500%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+1125%
4−5
−1125%
Fortnite 80−85
+531%
12−14
−531%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+369%
12−14
−369%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+1050%
4−5
−1050%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+308%
12−14
−308%
Valorant 120−130
+173%
40−45
−173%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 35−40
+429%
7−8
−429%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+688%
8−9
−688%
Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+1267%
6−7
−1267%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 190−200
+298%
45−50
−298%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+500%
5−6
−500%
Dota 2 90−95
+114%
43
−114%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+1125%
4−5
−1125%
Fortnite 80−85
+531%
12−14
−531%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+369%
12−14
−369%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+1050%
4−5
−1050%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+686%
7−8
−686%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+650%
4−5
−650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+308%
12−14
−308%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+111%
19
−111%
Valorant 120−130
+173%
40−45
−173%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+688%
8−9
−688%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33
+500%
5−6
−500%
Dota 2 90−95
+163%
35
−163%
Far Cry 5 45−50
+1125%
4−5
−1125%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+369%
12−14
−369%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+308%
12−14
−308%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+344%
9
−344%
Valorant 120−130
+173%
40−45
−173%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 80−85
+531%
12−14
−531%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+833%
3−4
−833%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+500%
18−20
−500%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Metro Exodus 18−20 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+527%
21−24
−527%
Valorant 140−150
+548%
21−24
−548%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+471%
7−8
−471%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+550%
2−3
−550%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+700%
4−5
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+500%
6−7
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+700%
3−4
−700%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+540%
5−6
−540%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+80%
14−16
−80%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
+567%
3−4
−567%
Valorant 80−85
+515%
12−14
−515%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+600%
3−4
−600%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Dota 2 50−55
+643%
7−8
−643%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%

This is how Pro 5300M and Qualcomm Adreno 690 compete in popular games:

  • Pro 5300M is 445% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Pro 5300M is 2400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Pro 5300M surpassed Qualcomm Adreno 690 in all 56 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.33 2.35
Recency 13 November 2019 6 December 2018
Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 85 Watt 7 Watt

Pro 5300M has a 467.2% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 11 months.

Qualcomm Adreno 690, on the other hand, has a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 1114.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro 5300M is our recommended choice as it beats the Qualcomm Adreno 690 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro 5300M is a mobile workstation card while Qualcomm Adreno 690 is a mobile workstation 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 5300M
Radeon Pro 5300M
Qualcomm Adreno 690
Adreno 690

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.


4 172 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 5300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 11 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 690 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro 5300M or Qualcomm Adreno 690, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.