Radeon R3 Graphics vs RX Vega 64

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking125not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation23.75no data
Power efficiency2.87no data
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameVega 10Beema
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date7 August 2017 (7 years ago)28 January 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 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 cores4096128
Core clock speed1247 MHz267 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million930 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate395.84.800
Floating-point processing power12.66 TFLOPS0.1536 TFLOPS
ROPs644
TMUs2568

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 x16IGP
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinno data

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 typeHBM2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount8 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width2048 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed945 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth483.8 GB/sno data
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)12 (12_0)
Shader Model6.46.3
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.1.1251.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 August 2017 28 January 2015
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 15 Watt

RX Vega 64 has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

R3 Graphics, on the other hand, has 1866.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 64 and Radeon R3 Graphics. 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 64
Radeon RX Vega 64
AMD Radeon R3 Graphics
Radeon R3 Graphics

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.


4.3 671 vote

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 683 votes

Rate Radeon R3 Graphics 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.