H3C XG310 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking658not rated
Place by popularity30not in top-100
Power efficiency20.91no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeDG1
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date26 October 2017 (7 years ago)11 November 2020 (4 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 cores512768
Core clock speedno data1050 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHz1100 MHz
Manufacturing process technology14 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rateno data52.80
Floating-point processing powerno data1.69 TFLOPS
ROPsno data24
TMUsno data48

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 dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 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 typeno dataLPDDR4X
Maximum RAM amountno data8 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2133 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data68.26 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 26 October 2017 11 November 2020
Chip lithography 14 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 300 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has 1900% lower power consumption.

H3C XG310, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and H3C XG310. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while H3C XG310 is a workstation one.


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 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Intel H3C XG310
H3C XG310

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.


3.5 1399 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 7 votes

Rate H3C XG310 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.