Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 vs R5 (Stoney Ridge)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) and Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
M GL / 870 outperforms R5 (Stoney Ridge) by a whopping 853% 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 | 1061 | 434 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.28 | 15.01 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016) | Vega (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | Stoney Ridge | Vega Kaby Lake-G |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 June 2016 (9 years ago) | 7 January 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 | 192 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 931 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 800 MHz | 1011 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12-45 Watt | 65 Watt |
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 | medium sized |
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 | HBM2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | no data |
| Shared memory | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 12_1 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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.
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.
3DMark Ice Storm GPU
Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.
3DMark Time Spy Graphics
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 | 8
−438%
| 43
+438%
|
| 1440p | 2−3
−1300%
| 28
+1300%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−1300%
| 14
+1300%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−800%
|
27−30
+800%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 0−1 | 24−27 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−3000%
|
62
+3000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−800%
|
27−30
+800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1
−4100%
|
42
+4100%
|
| Fortnite | 7
−1129%
|
86
+1129%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5
−980%
|
50−55
+980%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−1900%
|
40−45
+1900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−370%
|
45−50
+370%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−229%
|
110−120
+229%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−2500%
|
52
+2500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−33
−500%
|
180−190
+500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−800%
|
27−30
+800%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−400%
|
85−90
+400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−1200%
|
39
+1200%
|
| Fortnite | 4−5
−1300%
|
56
+1300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−575%
|
50−55
+575%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3
−1900%
|
40−45
+1900%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 41 |
| Metro Exodus | 1
−2300%
|
24
+2300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−370%
|
45−50
+370%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−486%
|
41
+486%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−229%
|
110−120
+229%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3
−2300%
|
48
+2300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−800%
|
27−30
+800%
|
| Dota 2 | 16−18
−400%
|
85−90
+400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−1100%
|
36
+1100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−575%
|
50−55
+575%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−370%
|
45−50
+370%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
−243%
|
24
+243%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−229%
|
110−120
+229%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
−850%
|
38
+850%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−500%
|
24−27
+500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 9−10
−967%
|
95−100
+967%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−343%
|
62
+343%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−3300%
|
130−140
+3300%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 10−12 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−2300%
|
24
+2300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−933%
|
30−35
+933%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−800%
|
18−20
+800%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1100%
|
24
+1100%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−107%
|
29
+107%
|
| Valorant | 6−7
−1067%
|
70−75
+1067%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 1−2
−4600%
|
45−50
+4600%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−500%
|
12−14
+500%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−350%
|
9
+350%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14
+0%
|
14
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 34
+0%
|
34
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14
+0%
|
14
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 16
+0%
|
16
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12
+0%
|
12
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+0%
|
21−24
+0%
|
This is how R5 (Stoney Ridge) and RX Vega M GL / 870 compete in popular games:
- RX Vega M GL / 870 is 438% faster in 1080p
- RX Vega M GL / 870 is 1300% faster in 1440p
- RX Vega M GL / 870 is 1300% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Dota 2, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega M GL / 870 is 4600% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX Vega M GL / 870 performs better in 43 tests (75%)
- there's a draw in 14 tests (25%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.33 | 12.67 |
| Recency | 1 June 2016 | 7 January 2018 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 65 Watt |
R5 (Stoney Ridge) has 442% lower power consumption.
RX Vega M GL / 870, on the other hand, has a 853% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) 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.
