Radeon Vega 7 vs R5 M420
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R5 M420 and Radeon Vega 7, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Vega 7 outperforms R5 M420 by a whopping 456% 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 | 1091 | 601 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 14 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 11.43 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | GCN 5.1 (2018−2022) |
| GPU code name | Jet | Cezanne |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 May 2016 (9 years ago) | 13 April 2021 (4 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 | 320 | 448 |
| Core clock speed | 780 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 850 MHz | 1900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 690 million | 9,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 17.00 | 53.20 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.544 TFLOPS | 1.702 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 20 | 28 |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | no data |
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 | PCIe 3.0 x8 | 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 | DDR3 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 1000 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 16 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | 1.2 |
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 | 4−5
−475%
| 23
+475%
|
| 1440p | 5−6
−460%
| 28
+460%
|
| 4K | 3−4
−500%
| 18
+500%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−500%
|
18
+500%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2700%
|
28
+2700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−367%
|
14
+367%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 3−4
−667%
|
23
+667%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−900%
|
20
+900%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−2000%
|
63
+2000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−429%
|
37
+429%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24
+2300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−178%
|
24−27
+178%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−124%
|
70−75
+124%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2200%
|
23
+2200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 27−30
−107%
|
58
+107%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−233%
|
10
+233%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−431%
|
85−90
+431%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 3−4
−500%
|
18
+500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−800%
|
18
+800%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
−800%
|
27
+800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−400%
|
35
+400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−2000%
|
21
+2000%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 17 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−550%
|
13
+550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−156%
|
23
+156%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−157%
|
18
+157%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−121%
|
73
+121%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
−2000%
|
21
+2000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−200%
|
9
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−431%
|
85−90
+431%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 3−4
−800%
|
27−30
+800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−800%
|
18
+800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
−286%
|
27
+286%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−178%
|
24−27
+178%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−85.7%
|
13
+85.7%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+32%
|
25
−32%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−367%
|
14
+367%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−225%
|
12−14
+225%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 8−9
−550%
|
50−55
+550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
−233%
|
40−45
+233%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
−1500%
|
48
+1500%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 5−6 |
| Escape from Tarkov | 3−4
−333%
|
12−14
+333%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−1300%
|
14−16
+1300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−433%
|
16−18
+433%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−350%
|
9−10
+350%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−600%
|
14−16
+600%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−28.6%
|
18−20
+28.6%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−317%
|
25
+317%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−12
+0%
|
10−12
+0%
|
This is how R5 M420 and Vega 7 compete in popular games:
- Vega 7 is 475% faster in 1080p
- Vega 7 is 460% faster in 1440p
- Vega 7 is 500% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R5 M420 is 32% faster.
- in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Vega 7 is 2700% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R5 M420 performs better in 1 test (2%)
- Vega 7 performs better in 43 tests (75%)
- there's a draw in 13 tests (23%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.20 | 6.67 |
| Recency | 15 May 2016 | 13 April 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
Vega 7 has a 455.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon Vega 7 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 M420 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
