Radeon HD 8510G vs R5 (Bristol Ridge)

Place in the ranking	844	1125
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.75	1.88
Architecture	GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)	TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code name	Bristol Ridge	Devastator
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 June 2016 (8 years ago)	23 May 2013 (11 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	384
Core clock speed	no data	554 MHz
Boost clock speed	800 MHz	720 MHz
Number of transistors	3100 Million	1,303 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12-45 Watt	35 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	17.28
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.553 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	8
TMUs	no data	24

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	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	64/128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	no data	System Shared
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)	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	no data	5.0
OpenGL	no data	4.4
OpenCL	no data	1.2
Vulkan	-	N/A

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

11
+175%

4−5

−175%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +50%	8−9 −50%
Forza Horizon 5	1−2	0−1
Metro Exodus	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Valorant	1−2	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Dota 2	6 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +66.7%	9−10 −66.7%
Fortnite	12−14 +333%	3−4 −333%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +50%	8−9 −50%
Forza Horizon 5	1−2	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	19 +72.7%	10−12 −72.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +66.7%	6−7 −66.7%
Valorant	1−2	0−1
World of Tanks	45−50 +95.7%	21−24 −95.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	8−9 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
Dota 2	17 +183%	6−7 −183%
Far Cry 5	14−16 +66.7%	9−10 −66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +50%	8−9 −50%
Forza Horizon 5	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	21−24 +109%	10−12 −109%
Valorant	1−2	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	0−1	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 +240%	5−6 −240%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
World of Tanks	16−18 +300%	4−5 −300%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	2−3	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Valorant	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	16−18 +6.7%	14−16 −6.7%
Far Cry 5	2−3	0−1
Fortnite	1−2	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	0−1	0−1
Valorant	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

This is how R5 (Bristol Ridge) and HD 8510G compete in popular games:

R5 (Bristol Ridge) is 175% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R5 (Bristol Ridge) is 333% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

R5 (Bristol Ridge) is ahead in 31 test (86%)
there's a draw in 5 tests (14%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.34	0.91
Recency	1 June 2016	23 May 2013
Chip lithography	28 nm	32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	35 Watt

R5 (Bristol Ridge) has a 157.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 191.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8510G in performance tests.

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