GeForce GT 720M vs Radeon R6 (Carrizo)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R6 (Carrizo) and GeForce GT 720M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R6 (Carrizo)
2015
12 Watt
1.51
+26.9%

R6 (Carrizo) outperforms GT 720M by a significant 27% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking9751057
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.962.47
ArchitectureGCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameCarrizoGK208
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date4 June 2015 (9 years ago)25 December 2013 (10 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 cores384192
Core clock speedno data719 MHz
Boost clock speed800 MHz758 MHz
Number of transistors2410 Million915 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12-35 Watt33 Watt
Texture fill rateno data12.13
Floating-point processing powerno data0.2911 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data16

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 sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x8

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 typeno dataDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataDDR3
Memory bus width64/128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data12.8 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 2560x1600
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 2560x1600
HDMI-+
HDCP content protection-+
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI-+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Blu-Ray 3D Support-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12 API
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.5
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA-+

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.

R6 (Carrizo) 1.51
+26.9%
GT 720M 1.19

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.

R6 (Carrizo) 1438
+18.5%
GT 720M 1213

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

R6 (Carrizo) 4830
+5.4%
GT 720M 4585

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.

R6 (Carrizo) 909
+10.6%
GT 720M 822

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.

R6 (Carrizo) 4717
GT 720M 5426
+15%

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.

R6 (Carrizo) 53703
GT 720M 59694
+11.2%

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 HD11
−18.2%
13
+18.2%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−650%
30
+650%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3.1%
30−35
−3.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
−14.3%
16
+14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3.1%
30−35
−3.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3.1%
30−35
−3.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%

This is how R6 (Carrizo) and GT 720M compete in popular games:

  • GT 720M is 18% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R6 (Carrizo) is 300% faster.
  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 720M is 650% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R6 (Carrizo) is ahead in 26 tests (55%)
  • GT 720M is ahead in 2 tests (4%)
  • there's a draw in 19 tests (40%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.51 1.19
Recency 4 June 2015 25 December 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 33 Watt

R6 (Carrizo) has a 26.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 175% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R6 (Carrizo) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 720M in performance tests.


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

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R6 (Carrizo)
Radeon R6 (Carrizo)
NVIDIA GeForce GT 720M
GeForce GT 720M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.1 13 votes

Rate Radeon R6 (Carrizo) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 967 votes

Rate GeForce GT 720M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.