ATI Radeon 8500 vs RX Vega 5

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 5 with Radeon 8500, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 5
2020
15 Watt
4.26
+42500%

RX Vega 5 outperforms 8500 by a whopping 42500% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7221570
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.870.03
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameVegaR200
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2020 (6 years ago)14 August 2001 (24 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 cores320no data
Core clock speedno data275 MHz
Boost clock speed1400 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data60 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rateno data2.200
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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 dataAGP 4x
Widthno data1-slot
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 dataDDR
Maximum RAM amountno data64 MB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data275 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data8.8 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 data1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12_18.1
OpenGLno data1.4
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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 HD19-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 43 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9 0−1
Resident Evil 4 Remake 11 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 22 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 29 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1
Far Cry 5 15 0−1
Fortnite 52 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 20−22 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 17 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18 0−1
Valorant 55−60 0−1

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 18 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 7 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1
Dota 2 39 0−1
Far Cry 5 12 0−1
Fortnite 21 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 20−22 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 15 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 13 0−1
Metro Exodus 4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14 0−1
Valorant 55−60 0−1

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10 0−1
Dota 2 37 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 20−22 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9 0−1
Valorant 55−60 0−1

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 12 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3 0−1
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35 0−1
Valorant 45−50 0−1

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 8−9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−11 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18 0−1
Valorant 21−24 0−1

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 14−16 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.26 0.01
Recency 7 January 2020 14 August 2001
Chip lithography 7 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 23 Watt

RX Vega 5 has a 42500% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 18 years, a 2042.9% more advanced lithography process, and 53.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 5 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 8500 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 5 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon 8500 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 5
Radeon RX Vega 5
ATI Radeon 8500
Radeon 8500

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.


3.9 237 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 109 votes

Rate Radeon 8500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 5 or Radeon 8500, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.