Radeon HD 7690M XT vs RX 580 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX 580 Mobile and Radeon HD 7690M XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
580 Mobile outperforms HD 7690M XT by a whopping 652% 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 | 338 | 885 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 8.17 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 13.92 | 7.40 |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Polaris 20 | Thames |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 18 April 2017 (8 years ago) | 7 January 2013 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $301.69 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 cores | 2304 | 480 |
| Core clock speed | 1000 MHz | 725 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1077 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 5,700 million | 716 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 25 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 155.1 | 17.40 |
| Floating-point processing power | 4.963 TFLOPS | 0.696 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 8 |
| TMUs | 144 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 576 KB | 48 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 256 KB |
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 | large | medium sized |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
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 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2000 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 256.0 GB/s | 57.6 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
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.
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:
| 900p | 150−160
+614%
| 21
−614%
|
| Full HD | 77
+235%
| 23
−235%
|
| 4K | 30
+900%
| 3−4
−900%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | 3.92 | no data |
| 4K | 10.06 | no data |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 100−110
+1650%
|
6−7
−1650%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+680%
|
5−6
−680%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+400%
|
7−8
−400%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+1000%
|
7−8
−1000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 100−110
+1650%
|
6−7
−1650%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+680%
|
5−6
−680%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 60−65
+757%
|
7−8
−757%
|
| Fortnite | 183
+1425%
|
12−14
−1425%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 75−80
+477%
|
12−14
−477%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+1060%
|
5−6
−1060%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+400%
|
7−8
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 69
+475%
|
12−14
−475%
|
| Valorant | 140−150
+236%
|
40−45
−236%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+1000%
|
7−8
−1000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 100−110
+1650%
|
6−7
−1650%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 220−230
+371%
|
45−50
−371%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+680%
|
5−6
−680%
|
| Dota 2 | 76
+204%
|
24−27
−204%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 60−65
+757%
|
7−8
−757%
|
| Fortnite | 81
+575%
|
12−14
−575%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 75−80
+477%
|
12−14
−477%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 55−60
+1060%
|
5−6
−1060%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 62
+1140%
|
5−6
−1140%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+400%
|
7−8
−400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 35−40
+875%
|
4−5
−875%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 57
+375%
|
12−14
−375%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 68
+656%
|
9−10
−656%
|
| Valorant | 140−150
+236%
|
40−45
−236%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 75−80
+1000%
|
7−8
−1000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 35−40
+680%
|
5−6
−680%
|
| Dota 2 | 69
+176%
|
24−27
−176%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 60−65
+757%
|
7−8
−757%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 75−80
+477%
|
12−14
−477%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40
+400%
|
7−8
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 41
+242%
|
12−14
−242%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 37
+311%
|
9−10
−311%
|
| Valorant | 140−150
+236%
|
40−45
−236%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 60
+400%
|
12−14
−400%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+517%
|
6−7
−517%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 130−140
+644%
|
18−20
−644%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+700%
|
4−5
−700%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 160−170
+635%
|
21−24
−635%
|
| Valorant | 170−180
+775%
|
20−22
−775%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+767%
|
6−7
−767%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
+925%
|
4−5
−925%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+667%
|
6−7
−667%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 20−22
+900%
|
2−3
−900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+600%
|
4−5
−600%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 40−45
+950%
|
4−5
−950%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−35
+127%
|
14−16
−127%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 24
+700%
|
3−4
−700%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+775%
|
12−14
−775%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
+833%
|
3−4
−833%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 60−65
+967%
|
6−7
−967%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 10−12
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14
+367%
|
3−4
−367%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
This is how RX 580 Mobile and HD 7690M XT compete in popular games:
- RX 580 Mobile is 614% faster in 900p
- RX 580 Mobile is 235% faster in 1080p
- RX 580 Mobile is 900% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 580 Mobile is 3100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RX 580 Mobile surpassed HD 7690M XT in all 55 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 18.12 | 2.41 |
| Recency | 18 April 2017 | 7 January 2013 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 2 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 25 Watt |
RX 580 Mobile has a 651.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.
HD 7690M XT, on the other hand, has 300% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX 580 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7690M XT 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.
