Radeon 620 vs R9 Fury

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 Fury with Radeon 620, including specs and performance data.

R9 Fury
2015
4 GB High Bandwidth Memory (HBM), 275 Watt
24.86
+972%

R9 Fury outperforms 620 by a whopping 972% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking215848
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.10no data
Power efficiency6.283.23
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameFijiPolaris 24
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date10 July 2015 (9 years ago)13 May 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores3584384
Compute units56no data
Core clock speedno data730 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1024 MHz
Number of transistors8,900 million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate224.024.58
Floating-point processing power7.168 TFLOPS0.7864 TFLOPS
ROPs648
TMUs22424

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors​2x 8-pinNone
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 typeHigh Bandwidth Memory (HBM)DDR3
High bandwidth memory (HBM)+no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width4096 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth512 GB/s14.4 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.36.3
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan+1.2.131
Mantle+-

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.

R9 Fury 24.86
+972%
Radeon 620 2.32

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 Fury 9593
+973%
Radeon 620 894

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 Fury 14580
+743%
Radeon 620 1730

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 HD90
+1025%
8−9
−1025%
1440p87
+988%
8−9
−988%
4K48
+1100%
4−5
−1100%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.10no data
1440p6.31no data
4K11.44no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+575%
8−9
−575%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+1300%
3−4
−1300%
Battlefield 5 80−85
+2600%
3−4
−2600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+750%
6−7
−750%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+1325%
4−5
−1325%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+983%
6−7
−983%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+1218%
10−12
−1218%
Hitman 3 50−55
+614%
7−8
−614%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+505%
18−20
−505%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+8400%
1−2
−8400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+1200%
5−6
−1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85
+664%
10−12
−664%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+178%
35−40
−178%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 50−55
+575%
8−9
−575%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+1300%
3−4
−1300%
Battlefield 5 51
+1600%
3−4
−1600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+750%
6−7
−750%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+1325%
4−5
−1325%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+983%
6−7
−983%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+1218%
10−12
−1218%
Hitman 3 50−55
+614%
7−8
−614%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+505%
18−20
−505%
Metro Exodus 85−90
+8400%
1−2
−8400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+1200%
5−6
−1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85
+664%
10−12
−664%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+315%
12−14
−315%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+178%
35−40
−178%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 29
+263%
8−9
−263%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45
+1300%
3−4
−1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+750%
6−7
−750%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+700%
5−6
−700%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+1325%
4−5
−1325%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+1218%
10−12
−1218%
Hitman 3 50−55
+614%
7−8
−614%
Horizon Zero Dawn 110−120
+505%
18−20
−505%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 80−85
+664%
10−12
−664%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+254%
12−14
−254%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+178%
35−40
−178%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+1200%
5−6
−1200%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+1075%
4−5
−1075%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+1167%
3−4
−1167%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+1100%
2−3
−1100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+867%
3−4
−867%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+1083%
12−14
−1083%
Hitman 3 30−33
+329%
7−8
−329%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+750%
6−7
−750%
Metro Exodus 45−50
+1075%
4−5
−1075%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+980%
5−6
−980%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+3000%
1−2
−3000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+977%
12−14
−977%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+740%
5−6
−740%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 38 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Hitman 3 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+1180%
10−11
−1180%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+1300%
2−3
−1300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+1100%
3−4
−1100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 11
+450%
2−3
−450%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Far Cry 5 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+1033%
3−4
−1033%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−33
+1400%
2−3
−1400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+633%
3−4
−633%

This is how R9 Fury and Radeon 620 compete in popular games:

  • R9 Fury is 1025% faster in 1080p
  • R9 Fury is 988% faster in 1440p
  • R9 Fury is 1100% faster in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R9 Fury is 8400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, R9 Fury surpassed Radeon 620 in all 56 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.86 2.32
Recency 10 July 2015 13 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 50 Watt

R9 Fury has a 971.6% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

Radeon 620, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and 450% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 Fury is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 620 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R9 Fury is a desktop card while Radeon 620 is a notebook one.


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 R9 Fury
Radeon R9 Fury
AMD Radeon 620
Radeon 620

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.


3.7 173 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 65 votes

Rate Radeon 620 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.