Radeon 880M vs Pro Vega 64X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega 64X with Radeon 880M, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega 64X
2019
16 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
31.95
+73.1%

Pro 64X outperforms 880M by an impressive 73% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking190329
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency9.8194.47
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025)
GPU code nameVega 10Strix Point
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date19 March 2019 (6 years ago)15 July 2024 (1 year 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 cores4096768
Core clock speed1250 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1468 MHz2900 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million34,000 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate375.8139.2
Floating-point processing power12.03 TFLOPS4.454 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs25648
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L0 Cacheno data192 KB
L1 Cache1 MB128 KB
L2 Cache4 MB2 MB

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 sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeHBM2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount16 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width2048 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1000 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth512.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.1.1251.3

Synthetic benchmarks

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 Vega 64X 31.95
+73.1%
Radeon 880M 18.46

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 Vega 64X 13369
+73.1%
Samples: 3
Radeon 880M 7725
Samples: 422

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 HD60−65
+66.7%
36
−66.7%
1440p35−40
+59.1%
22
−59.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 95
+0%
95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 70
+0%
70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 54
+0%
54
+0%
Fortnite 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 39
+0%
39
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%
Fortnite 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 54
+0%
54
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 53
+0%
53
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Far Cry 5 46
+0%
46
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 33
+0%
33
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 22
+0%
22
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

This is how Pro Vega 64X and Radeon 880M compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 64X is 67% faster in 1080p
  • Pro Vega 64X is 59% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 31.95 18.46
Recency 19 March 2019 15 July 2024
Chip lithography 14 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 15 Watt

Pro Vega 64X has a 73.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Radeon 880M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 1566.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro Vega 64X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 880M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 64X is a mobile workstation graphics card while Radeon 880M 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 Vega 64X
Radeon Pro Vega 64X
AMD Radeon 880M
Radeon 880M

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.


3.9 38 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 50 votes

Rate Radeon 880M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon Pro Vega 64X or Radeon 880M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.