GeForce 210 PCI vs Radeon RX Vega 56

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking149not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation25.05no data
Power efficiency11.30no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameVega 10GT216
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date14 August 2017 (7 years ago)12 October 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 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 cores358416
Core clock speed1156 MHz475 MHz
Boost clock speed1471 MHzno data
Number of transistors12,500 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)210 Watt31 Watt
Texture fill rate329.53.800
Floating-point processing power10.54 TFLOPS0.0352 TFLOPS
ROPs644
TMUs2248

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCI
Length267 mm145 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone

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 typeHBM2DDR2
Maximum RAM amount8 GB512 MB
Memory bus width2048 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth409.6 GB/s6.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.1.125N/A
CUDA-1.2

Pros & cons summary


Recency 14 August 2017 12 October 2009
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 210 Watt 31 Watt

RX Vega 56 has an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

210 PCI, on the other hand, has 577.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 56 and GeForce 210 PCI. We've got no test results to judge.


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 RX Vega 56
Radeon RX Vega 56
NVIDIA GeForce 210 PCI
GeForce 210 PCI

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.


4.3 766 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 56 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 77 votes

Rate GeForce 210 PCI 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.