GRID M3-3020 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) with GRID M3-3020, including specs and performance data.
M3-3020 outperforms 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) by an impressive 70% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 722 | 587 |
| Place by popularity | 40 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 21.25 | no data |
| Architecture | Vega (2017−2020) | Maxwell (2014−2017) |
| GPU code name | Vega Raven Ridge | GM107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Workstation |
| Release date | 26 October 2017 (8 years ago) | 18 May 2016 (9 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 | 512 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 1033 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1200 MHz | 1306 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 9,800 million | 1,870 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 57.60 | 52.24 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.843 TFLOPS | 1.672 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 16 |
| TMUs | 32 | 40 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 320 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 2 MB |
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).
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 267 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 8-pin |
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 | System Shared | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 1300 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 83.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | - | 5.0 |
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 HD | 18
−66.7%
| 30−35
+66.7%
|
| 4K | 10
−60%
| 16−18
+60%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
−66.7%
|
30−33
+66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 11
−63.6%
|
18−20
+63.6%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 24
−66.7%
|
40−45
+66.7%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
−66.7%
|
30−33
+66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 15
−60%
|
24−27
+60%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12
−50%
|
18−20
+50%
|
| Fortnite | 30
−66.7%
|
50−55
+66.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 26
−53.8%
|
40−45
+53.8%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 17
−58.8%
|
27−30
+58.8%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
−69.6%
|
95−100
+69.6%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 22
−59.1%
|
35−40
+59.1%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
−66.7%
|
30−33
+66.7%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 42
−66.7%
|
70−75
+66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| Dota 2 | 38
−57.9%
|
60−65
+57.9%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 16−18
−68.8%
|
27−30
+68.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
| Fortnite | 19
−57.9%
|
30−33
+57.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30
−66.7%
|
50−55
+66.7%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 13
−61.5%
|
21−24
+61.5%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7
−42.9%
|
10−11
+42.9%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14
−50%
|
21−24
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 13
−61.5%
|
21−24
+61.5%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
−69.6%
|
95−100
+69.6%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 23
−52.2%
|
35−40
+52.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5
−60%
|
8−9
+60%
|
| Dota 2 | 35
−57.1%
|
55−60
+57.1%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 16−18
−68.8%
|
27−30
+68.8%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 23
−52.2%
|
35−40
+52.2%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9−10
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14
−50%
|
21−24
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Valorant | 15
−60%
|
24−27
+60%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 10
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−35
−56.3%
|
50−55
+56.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
−66.7%
|
55−60
+66.7%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
−59.1%
|
70−75
+59.1%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−60%
|
16−18
+60%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−68.8%
|
27−30
+68.8%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
−66.7%
|
35−40
+66.7%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 6
−66.7%
|
10−11
+66.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 15
−60%
|
24−27
+60%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9
−55.6%
|
14−16
+55.6%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and GRID M3-3020 compete in popular games:
- GRID M3-3020 is 67% faster in 1080p
- GRID M3-3020 is 60% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.15 | 7.07 |
| Recency | 26 October 2017 | 18 May 2016 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
GRID M3-3020, on the other hand, has a 70.4% higher aggregate performance score.
The GRID M3-3020 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook graphics card while GRID M3-3020 is a workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
