GMA 3150 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4911535
Place by popularity32not in top-100
Power efficiency41.35no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameVegaPineview
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date7 January 2020 (5 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 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 cores51216
Core clock speedno data400 MHz
Boost clock speed2100 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data123 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm45 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rateno data0.8
Floating-point processing powerno data0.0128 TFLOPS
ROPsno data1
TMUsno data2

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 dataPCI

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 dataSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountno dataSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_19.0c
Shader Modelno data3.0
OpenGLno data2.0
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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 HD23no data
1440p17no data
4K9no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 13 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 19 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30 no data
Counter-Strike 2 12 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 15 no data
Forza Horizon 4 32 no data
Forza Horizon 5 21 no data
Metro Exodus 27 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 33 no data
Valorant 44 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30 no data
Counter-Strike 2 9 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 11 no data
Dota 2 29 no data
Far Cry 5 30 no data
Fortnite 50−55 no data
Forza Horizon 4 27 no data
Forza Horizon 5 13 no data
Grand Theft Auto V 19 no data
Metro Exodus 19 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 57 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 12 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30 no data
Valorant 14 no data
World of Tanks 48 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30 no data
Counter-Strike 2 8 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 9 no data
Dota 2 48 no data
Far Cry 5 35−40 no data
Forza Horizon 4 23 no data
Forza Horizon 5 14 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 70−75 no data
Valorant 37 no data

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 9 no data
Grand Theft Auto V 9 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 22 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8 no data
World of Tanks 21 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 2 no data
Far Cry 5 18−20 no data
Forza Horizon 4 16 no data
Forza Horizon 5 12−14 no data
Metro Exodus 17 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14 no data
Valorant 39 no data

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11 no data
Dota 2 10 no data
Grand Theft Auto V 10 no data
Metro Exodus 6 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 13 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9 no data
Counter-Strike 2 10−11 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data
Dota 2 18 no data
Far Cry 5 10−12 no data
Fortnite 9−10 no data
Forza Horizon 4 9 no data
Forza Horizon 5 6−7 no data
Valorant 9−10 no data

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 January 2020 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 7 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 13 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has an age advantage of 12 years, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.

GMA 3150, on the other hand, has 15.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and GMA 3150. 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 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Intel GMA 3150
GMA 3150

Other comparisons

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.


3.8 1293 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 141 vote

Rate GMA 3150 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.