Radeon Vega 7 vs R5 (Carrizo)

Place in the ranking	919	532
Place by popularity	not in top-100	12
Power efficiency	3.63	11.47
Architecture	GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)	GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code name	Carrizo	Cezanne
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	4 June 2015 (9 years ago)	13 April 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	256	448
Core clock speed	no data	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	800 MHz	1900 MHz
Number of transistors	2410 Million	9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12-35 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	53.20
Floating-point processing power	no data	1.702 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	8
TMUs	no data	28

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
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	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)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	no data	6.4
OpenGL	no data	4.6
OpenCL	no data	2.1
Vulkan	-	1.2

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R5 (Carrizo) 1.84

Vega 7 7.48
+307%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

R5 (Carrizo) 1711

Vega 7 5249
+207%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

R5 (Carrizo) 1001

Vega 7 3348
+234%

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

R5 (Carrizo) 5804

Vega 7 24726
+326%

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	5−6 −360%	23 +360%
1440p	6−7 −317%	25 +317%
4K	3−4 −400%	15 +400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −50%	14−16 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
Elden Ring	2−3 −600%	14 +600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −700%	24−27 +700%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −50%	14−16 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −190%	29 +190%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −2000%	21 +2000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −238%	27 +238%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −700%	24−27 +700%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −50%	14−16 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
Dota 2	3−4 −467%	17 +467%
Elden Ring	2−3 −700%	16 +700%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −133%	28 +133%
Fortnite	9−10 −389%	40−45 +389%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −140%	24 +140%
Grand Theft Auto V	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Metro Exodus	1−2 −1400%	15 +1400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20 −156%	46 +156%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 −163%	21−24 +163%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9 −188%	21−24 +188%
World of Tanks	35−40 −61.1%	58 +61.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 −700%	24−27 +700%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 −50%	14−16 +50%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
Dota 2	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Far Cry 5	12−14 −175%	30−35 +175%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 −110%	21 +110%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	18−20 −233%	60−65 +233%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 −275%	45−50 +275%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
World of Tanks	10−12 −391%	50−55 +391%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −11.1%	10−11 +11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −300%	8−9 +300%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −167%	16−18 +167%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 −300%	12−14 +300%
Valorant	7−8 −171%	18−20 +171%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 −12.5%	18−20 +12.5%
Elden Ring	0−1	4−5
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −300%	60−65 +300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	5−6 −340%	21−24 +340%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −400%	5−6 +400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −500%	6−7 +500%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Dota 2	16−18 −306%	65−70 +306%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −800%	9−10 +800%
Fortnite	0−1	7−8
Valorant	2−3 −250%	7−8 +250%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Valorant

+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Valorant

+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Valorant

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2

8−9

+0%

8−9

+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Metro Exodus	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

This is how R5 (Carrizo) and Vega 7 compete in popular games:

Vega 7 is 360% faster in 1080p
Vega 7 is 317% faster in 1440p
Vega 7 is 400% faster in 4K

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

in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Vega 7 is 2000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Vega 7 is ahead in 37 tests (77%)
there's a draw in 11 tests (23%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.84	7.48
Recency	4 June 2015	13 April 2021
Chip lithography	28 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	45 Watt

R5 (Carrizo) has 275% lower power consumption.

Vega 7, on the other hand, has a 306.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Vega 7 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 (Carrizo) in performance tests.

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