UHD Graphics 615 vs Radeon R9 270

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270 with UHD Graphics 615, including specs and performance data.

R9 270
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
10.28
+465%

R9 270 outperforms UHD Graphics 615 by a whopping 465% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking461942
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.37no data
Power efficiency5.229.24
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameCuracaoAmber Lake GT2
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 November 2013 (11 years ago)7 November 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$179 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores1280192
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHz900 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate74.0021.60
Floating-point processing power2.368 TFLOPS0.3456 TFLOPS
ROPs323
TMUs8024

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16Ring Bus
Length210 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/sno 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data
Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan+1.3

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.

R9 270 10.28
+465%
UHD Graphics 615 1.82

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 270 4306
+464%
UHD Graphics 615 764

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.

R9 270 5930
+624%
UHD Graphics 615 819

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 HD55−60
+450%
10
−450%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.25no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Fortnite 8
+0%
8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 13
+0%
13
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 1
+0%
1
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Dota 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how R9 270 and UHD Graphics 615 compete in popular games:

  • R9 270 is 450% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 48 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.28 1.82
Recency 13 November 2013 7 November 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 15 Watt

R9 270 has a 464.8% higher aggregate performance score.

UHD Graphics 615, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 900% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 270 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 615 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 270 is a desktop graphics card while UHD Graphics 615 is a notebook one.

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 R9 270
Radeon R9 270
Intel UHD Graphics 615
UHD Graphics 615

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.


3.9 653 votes

Rate Radeon R9 270 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 41 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 615 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 270 or UHD Graphics 615, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.