Radeon HD 7660G vs RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Place in the ranking	589	1049
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	27.91	2.42
Architecture	Vega (2017−2020)	TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code name	Vega Renoir	Devastator
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	7 January 2020 (5 years ago)	15 May 2012 (12 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 cores	384	384
Core clock speed	400 MHz	686 MHz
Boost clock speed	1500 MHz	686 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	1,303 million
Manufacturing process technology	7 nm	32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	35 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	16.46
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.5268 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	8
TMUs	no data	24

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	no data	medium sized
Interface	no data	IGP

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	no data	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	no data	System Shared
Memory bus width	no data	System Shared
Memory clock speed	no data	System Shared
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 Connectors

no data

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12_1	11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model	no data	5.0
OpenGL	no data	4.4
OpenCL	no data	1.2
Vulkan	-	N/A

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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 6.07
+393%

HD 7660G 1.23

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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 4210
+298%

HD 7660G 1057

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 21857
+241%

HD 7660G 6409

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 182608
+179%

HD 7660G 65558

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	50−55 +355%	11 −355%
Full HD	20 +33.3%	15 −33.3%
1200p	40−45 +344%	9 −344%
1440p	22 +450%	4−5 −450%
4K	17 +467%	3−4 −467%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +71.4%	7−8 −71.4%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +175%	4−5 −175%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +1800%	1−2 −1800%
Counter-Strike 2	9 +28.6%	7−8 −28.6%
Cyberpunk 2077	9 +125%	4−5 −125%
Forza Horizon 4	26 +225%	8−9 −225%
Forza Horizon 5	16 +433%	3−4 −433%
Metro Exodus	14 +600%	2−3 −600%
Red Dead Redemption 2	22 +267%	6−7 −267%
Valorant	25 +400%	5−6 −400%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +1800%	1−2 −1800%
Counter-Strike 2	8 +14.3%	7−8 −14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Dota 2	24 +380%	5 −380%
Far Cry 5	26 +189%	9 −189%
Fortnite	35−40 +620%	5−6 −620%
Forza Horizon 4	21 +163%	8−9 −163%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Grand Theft Auto V	15 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +400%	3−4 −400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	39 +255%	11 −255%
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20 +200%	6−7 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +171%	7−8 −171%
Valorant	12 +500%	2−3 −500%
World of Tanks	56 +43.6%	39 −43.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +1800%	1−2 −1800%
Counter-Strike 2	7 +0%	7−8 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14 +225%	4−5 −225%
Dota 2	40 +167%	15 −167%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +180%	10−11 −180%
Forza Horizon 4	18 +125%	8−9 −125%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +257%	14−16 −257%
Valorant	19 +533%	3−4 −533%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Grand Theft Auto V	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	35−40 +429%	7−8 −429%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6	0−1
World of Tanks	40−45 +529%	7−8 −529%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11 +400%	2−3 −400%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +160%	5−6 −160%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Forza Horizon 5	9−10	0−1
Metro Exodus	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 +125%	4−5 −125%
Valorant	16−18 +167%	6−7 −167%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +13.3%	14−16 −13.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	16−18 +13.3%	14−16 −13.3%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	16−18 +467%	3−4 −467%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	16−18 +13.3%	14−16 −13.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	19 +26.7%	14−16 −26.7%
Far Cry 5	7−8	0−1
Fortnite	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Forza Horizon 5	4−5	0−1
Valorant	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%

This is how RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and HD 7660G compete in popular games:

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 355% faster in 900p
RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 33% faster in 1080p
RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 344% faster in 1200p
RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 450% faster in 1440p
RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 467% faster in 4K

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

in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 1800% faster.
in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 7660G is 33% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is ahead in 37 tests (90%)
HD 7660G is ahead in 1 test (2%)
there's a draw in 3 tests (7%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.07	1.23
Recency	7 January 2020	15 May 2012
Chip lithography	7 nm	32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	35 Watt

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 393.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 357.1% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7660G in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.