ATI Radeon 8500 XT vs RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking660not rated
Place by popularity38not in top-100
Power efficiency20.61no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeR250
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date26 October 2017 (7 years ago)1 June 2002 (22 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 cores512no data
Core clock speed300 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistors9,800 million60 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate57.602.400
Floating-point processing power1.843 TFLOPSno data
ROPs84
TMUs328

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).

InterfaceIGPAGP 4x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeSystem SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared128 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared300 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data9.6 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)8.1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.61.4
OpenCL2.1N/A
Vulkan1.2N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 26 October 2017 1 June 2002
Chip lithography 14 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 25 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has an age advantage of 15 years, a 971.4% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and Radeon 8500 XT. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while Radeon 8500 XT is a desktop 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)
ATI Radeon 8500 XT
Radeon 8500 XT

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 1451 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon 8500 XT 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.