Radeon HD 6950M vs RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and Radeon HD 6950M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
8.95
+149%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) outperforms HD 6950M by a whopping 149% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking497729
Place by popularity31not in top-100
Power efficiency41.014.93
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameVegaBlackcomb
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date7 January 2020 (5 years ago)4 January 2011 (14 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 cores512960
Core clock speedno data580 MHz
Boost clock speed2100 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data1,700 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data27.84
Floating-point processing powerno data1.114 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Interfaceno dataMXM-B (3.0)

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 dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data1 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data115.2 GB/s
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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12_111.2 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.0
OpenGLno data4.4
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 8.95
+149%
HD 6950M 3.59

  • Other tests
    • 3DMark 11 Performance GPU
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 5891
+140%
HD 6950M 2452

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 22428
+122%
HD 6950M 10122

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 HD22
+175%
8−9
−175%
1440p17
+183%
6−7
−183%
4K10
+150%
4−5
−150%

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
Atomic Heart 24
+200%
8−9
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 13
+30%
10−11
−30%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+157%
7−8
−157%
Atomic Heart 19
+138%
8−9
−138%
Battlefield 5 39
+225%
12−14
−225%
Counter-Strike 2 9
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 13
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%
Far Cry 5 21
+163%
8−9
−163%
Fortnite 47
+161%
18−20
−161%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+131%
16−18
−131%
Forza Horizon 5 21
+250%
6−7
−250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+100%
14−16
−100%
Valorant 80−85
+68%
50−55
−68%
Atomic Heart 11
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Battlefield 5 33
+175%
12−14
−175%
Counter-Strike 2 9
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 48
−29.2%
60−65
+29.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Dota 2 51
+59.4%
30−35
−59.4%
Far Cry 5 20
+150%
8−9
−150%
Fortnite 31
+72.2%
18−20
−72.2%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+131%
16−18
−131%
Forza Horizon 5 13
+117%
6−7
−117%
Grand Theft Auto V 19
+90%
10−11
−90%
Metro Exodus 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+100%
14−16
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
+110%
10−11
−110%
Valorant 80−85
+68%
50−55
−68%
Battlefield 5 30
+150%
12−14
−150%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Dota 2 48
+50%
30−35
−50%
Far Cry 5 19
+138%
8−9
−138%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+131%
16−18
−131%
Forza Horizon 5 14
+133%
6−7
−133%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−33
+100%
14−16
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+40%
10−11
−40%
Valorant 37
−35.1%
50−55
+35.1%
Fortnite 18
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 21
−19%
24−27
+19%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Metro Exodus 10
+400%
2−3
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 22
−13.6%
24−27
+13.6%
Valorant 95−100
+179%
30−35
−179%
Battlefield 5 21
+163%
8−9
−163%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+150%
2−3
−150%
Far Cry 5 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+150%
8−9
−150%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Fortnite 16−18
+183%
6−7
−183%
Atomic Heart 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 10
−60%
16−18
+60%
Metro Exodus 6
+200%
2−3
−200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Valorant 40−45
+153%
16−18
−153%
Battlefield 5 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Dota 2 18
+80%
10−11
−80%
Far Cry 5 8
+100%
4−5
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Fortnite 8−9
+100%
4−5
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and HD 6950M compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 175% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 183% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 150% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 500% faster.
  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the HD 6950M is 60% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is ahead in 52 tests (85%)
  • HD 6950M is ahead in 7 tests (11%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.95 3.59
Recency 7 January 2020 4 January 2011
Chip lithography 7 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 50 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 149.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6950M in performance tests.

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)
AMD Radeon HD 6950M
Radeon HD 6950M

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
1348 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5
1 vote

Rate Radeon HD 6950M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) or Radeon HD 6950M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.