RTX A500 vs Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)

Place in the ranking	842	315
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.75	20.12
Architecture	GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)	Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code name	Bristol Ridge	GA107
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	1 June 2016 (8 years ago)	10 November 2021 (3 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	384	2048
Core clock speed	no data	1440 MHz
Boost clock speed	800 MHz	1770 MHz
Number of transistors	3100 Million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12-45 Watt	60 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	113.3
Floating-point processing power	no data	7.25 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	32
TMUs	no data	64
Tensor Cores	no data	64
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	16

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	no data	PCIe 4.0 x8
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	no data	4 GB
Memory bus width	64/128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	112.0 GB/s
Shared memory	+	-

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 Connectors

no data

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (FL 12_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	no data	6.7
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	3.0
Vulkan	-	1.3
CUDA	-	8.6

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 HD

−582%

75−80
+582%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −588%	55−60 +588%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Elden Ring	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −600%	35−40 +600%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −588%	55−60 +588%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −608%	85−90 +608%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −575%	27−30 +575%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7 −614%	50−55 +614%
Valorant	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −600%	35−40 +600%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −588%	55−60 +588%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Dota 2	6 −567%	40−45 +567%
Elden Ring	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Fortnite	12−14 −592%	90−95 +592%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −608%	85−90 +608%
Grand Theft Auto V	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Metro Exodus	4−5 −575%	27−30 +575%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	19 −584%	130−140 +584%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 −567%	60−65 +567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −600%	70−75 +600%
Valorant	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
World of Tanks	45−50 −567%	300−310 +567%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 −600%	35−40 +600%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −588%	55−60 +588%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 −567%	40−45 +567%
Dota 2	17 −606%	120−130 +606%
Far Cry 5	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 −608%	85−90 +608%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 −596%	160−170 +596%
Valorant	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	0−1	0−1
Elden Ring	2−3 −600%	14−16 +600%
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 −606%	120−130 +606%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
World of Tanks	16−18 −588%	110−120 +588%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −588%	220−230 +588%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −575%	27−30 +575%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −614%	50−55 +614%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −600%	35−40 +600%
Valorant	9−10 −567%	60−65 +567%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −588%	110−120 +588%
Elden Ring	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 −614%	50−55 +614%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −567%	100−105 +567%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 −600%	14−16 +600%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −600%	14−16 +600%
Dota 2	16−18 −588%	110−120 +588%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −600%	14−16 +600%
Fortnite	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
Valorant	2−3 −600%	14−16 +600%

This is how R5 (Bristol Ridge) and RTX A500 compete in popular games:

RTX A500 is 582% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.45	17.51
Recency	1 June 2016	10 November 2021
Chip lithography	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	60 Watt

R5 (Bristol Ridge) has 400% lower power consumption.

RTX A500, on the other hand, has a 614.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) is a notebook card while RTX A500 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.