UHD Graphics 620 vs Radeon Pro Vega 64

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad
Buy on Amazon

Aggregated performance score

Pro Vega 64
2017
16 GB HBM2
33.55
+1161%

Radeon Pro Vega 64 outperforms UHD Graphics 620 by 1161% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking149773
Place by popularitynot in top-10018
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.020.75
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Gen. 9.5 (2017)
GPU code nameVega 10Kaby-Lake-Refresh GT2
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date27 June 2017 (6 years ago)1 September 2017 (6 years ago)
Current price$6074 $706

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Pro Vega 64 has 169% better value for money than UHD Graphics 620.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores409624
Core clock speed1250 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1150 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate345.627.60
Floating-point performance11,059 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon Pro Vega 64 and UHD Graphics 620 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x1
Length267 mmno data
WidthIGPno 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 typeHBM2LPDDR3/DDR4
Maximum RAM amount16 GB32 GB
Memory bus width2048 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1572 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth402.4 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

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 outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.1.1251.1.103

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

Pro Vega 64 33.55
+1161%
UHD Graphics 620 2.66

Radeon Pro Vega 64 outperforms UHD Graphics 620 by 1161% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Pro Vega 64 12984
+1161%
UHD Graphics 620 1030

Radeon Pro Vega 64 outperforms UHD Graphics 620 by 1161% in Passmark.

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 HD160−170
+1131%
13
−1131%
1440p200−210
+1150%
16
−1150%
4K100−110
+1150%
8
−1150%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.55 2.66
Recency 27 June 2017 1 September 2017
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 32 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 15 Watt

The Radeon Pro Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 620 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 64 is a workstation card while UHD 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.

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 Vega 64
Radeon Pro Vega 64
Intel UHD Graphics 620
UHD Graphics 620

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.3 18 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 3804 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.