GeForce FX 5700 Engineering Sample vs Radeon RX Vega 3

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking839not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency14.03no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code namePicassoNV36S
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date6 January 2019 (6 years ago)18 August 2003 (22 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 cores192no data
Core clock speed300 MHz425 MHz
Boost clock speed1001 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,940 million82 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate12.011.700
Floating-point processing power0.3844 TFLOPSno data
ROPs44
TMUs124

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).

InterfaceIGPAGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x Molex

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 typeSystem SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared128 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data8 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0a
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.61.5 (full) 2.0 (partial)
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 January 2019 18 August 2003
Chip lithography 14 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 25 Watt

RX Vega 3 has an age advantage of 15 years, a 828.6% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 3 and GeForce FX 5700 Engineering Sample. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 3 is a notebook graphics card while GeForce FX 5700 Engineering Sample is a desktop 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 RX Vega 3
Radeon RX Vega 3
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5700 Engineering Sample
GeForce FX 5700 Engineering Sample

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.


3.4 2209 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1 vote

Rate GeForce FX 5700 Engineering Sample on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 3 or GeForce FX 5700 Engineering Sample, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.