RTX A2000 Embedded vs Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) with RTX A2000 Embedded, including specs and performance data.

R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)
2014
2.54

RTX A2000 Embedded outperforms R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) by a whopping 946% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking872244
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data58.48
ArchitectureGCN (2012−2015)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameKaveri SpectreGA107S
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date14 January 2014 (12 years ago)30 March 2022 (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 cores3842560
Core clock speed720 MHz607 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1177 MHz
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rateno data94.16
Floating-point processing powerno data6.026 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data80
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20
L1 Cacheno data2.5 MB
L2 Cacheno data2 MB

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data96 GB/s
Shared memory+-
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectorsno dataPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.6
DLSS-+

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 HD14
−900%
140−150
+900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 8−9
−900%
80−85
+900%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Fortnite 12−14
−900%
130−140
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−900%
130−140
+900%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−900%
130−140
+900%
Valorant 40−45
−830%
400−450
+830%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 8−9
−900%
80−85
+900%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50−55
−900%
500−550
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Dota 2 24−27
−938%
270−280
+938%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Fortnite 12−14
−900%
130−140
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−900%
130−140
+900%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
−900%
90−95
+900%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−900%
130−140
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−900%
90−95
+900%
Valorant 40−45
−830%
400−450
+830%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 8−9
−900%
80−85
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%
Dota 2 24−27
−938%
270−280
+938%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−900%
130−140
+900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−900%
130−140
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−900%
90−95
+900%
Valorant 40−45
−830%
400−450
+830%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
−900%
130−140
+900%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
−900%
190−200
+900%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
−942%
250−260
+942%
Valorant 21−24
−945%
230−240
+945%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−900%
60−65
+900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−900%
40−45
+900%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
−900%
50−55
+900%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−900%
150−160
+900%
Valorant 12−14
−900%
120−130
+900%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 7−8
−900%
70−75
+900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
−900%
30−33
+900%

This is how R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) and RTX A2000 Embedded compete in popular games:

  • RTX A2000 Embedded is 900% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.54 26.58
Recency 14 January 2014 30 March 2022
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm

RTX A2000 Embedded has a 946% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A2000 Embedded is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) is a desktop graphics card while RTX A2000 Embedded is a mobile workstation one.

Other comparisons

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.


3.8 23 votes

Rate Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3 votes

Rate RTX A2000 Embedded on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 384 Cores (Kaveri Desktop) or RTX A2000 Embedded, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.