Radeon RX Vega M vs R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) with Radeon RX Vega M, including specs and performance data.
M outperforms R2 (Mullins/Beema/Carrizo-L) by a whopping 2469% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1265 | 377 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 80.44 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.1 (2014) | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | Beema/Mullins | Vega |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 29 April 2014 (12 years ago) | 1 February 2018 (8 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 cores | 128 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 720 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 600 MHz | 1190 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 38.08 |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 32 |
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).
| Interface | no data | IGP |
| Width | no data | IGP |
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 type | no data | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | System Shared |
| Shared memory | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 12.0 |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 2.0 |
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
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2300%
|
120−130
+2300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2400%
|
200−210
+2400%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−2400%
|
700−750
+2400%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 18−20
−2268%
|
450−500
+2268%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−2400%
|
300−310
+2400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2300%
|
120−130
+2300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2400%
|
200−210
+2400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−2300%
|
120−130
+2300%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−2400%
|
700−750
+2400%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−2400%
|
300−310
+2400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2300%
|
120−130
+2300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2400%
|
200−210
+2400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−2300%
|
120−130
+2300%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−2400%
|
700−750
+2400%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−2400%
|
75−80
+2400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4
−2400%
|
75−80
+2400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−2400%
|
150−160
+2400%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−2300%
|
24−27
+2300%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−2400%
|
350−400
+2400%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
−2400%
|
75−80
+2400%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.61 | 15.67 |
| Recency | 29 April 2014 | 1 February 2018 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
RX Vega M has a 2469% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX Vega M 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 RX Vega M is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
