Radeon Pro 5300 vs R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) with Radeon Pro 5300, including specs and performance data.

R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L)
2014
0.61

Pro 5300 outperforms R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) by a whopping 2679% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1265355
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data15.36
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 (2014)RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020)
GPU code nameBeema/MullinsNavi 14
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date29 April 2014 (11 years ago)4 August 2020 (5 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 cores1281280
Core clock speed300 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speed600 MHz1650 MHz
Number of transistorsno data6,400 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data85 Watt
Texture fill rateno data132.0
Floating-point processing powerno data4.224 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data80
L2 Cacheno data2 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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Widthno dataIGP
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data224.0 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.2

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−2650%
220−230
+2650%
Valorant 27−30
−2579%
750−800
+2579%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
−2532%
500−550
+2532%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Dota 2 12−14
−2400%
300−310
+2400%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−2650%
220−230
+2650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%
Valorant 27−30
−2579%
750−800
+2579%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Dota 2 12−14
−2400%
300−310
+2400%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
−2650%
220−230
+2650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−2500%
130−140
+2500%
Valorant 27−30
−2579%
750−800
+2579%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−2567%
80−85
+2567%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 3−4
−2567%
80−85
+2567%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2567%
160−170
+2567%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−2650%
55−60
+2650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−2650%
55−60
+2650%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−2400%
350−400
+2400%
Valorant 3−4
−2567%
80−85
+2567%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−2650%
55−60
+2650%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−2650%
55−60
+2650%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.61 16.95
Recency 29 April 2014 4 August 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm

Pro 5300 has a 2679% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro 5300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro 5300 is a workstation one.

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.


4.6 5 votes

Rate Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 100 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) or Radeon Pro 5300, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.