UHD Graphics 750 vs Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 with UHD Graphics 750, including specs and performance data.
RX Vega M GL / 870 outperforms UHD Graphics 750 by a whopping 208% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 376 | 662 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 14.73 | 20.75 |
| Architecture | Vega (2017−2020) | Generation 12.1 (2020−2021) |
| GPU code name | Vega Kaby Lake-G | Rocket Lake GT1 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 7 January 2018 (7 years ago) | 30 March 2021 (3 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 | 1280 | 256 |
| Core clock speed | 931 MHz | 300 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1011 MHz | 1300 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 14 nm+++ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 20.80 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.6656 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 16 |
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 size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | no data | Ring Bus |
| Width | no data | IGP |
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 | HBM2 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | no data | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | no data | System Shared |
| 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 Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2 |
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 | 44
+214%
| 14−16
−214%
|
| 1440p | 28
+211%
| 9−10
−211%
|
| 4K | 15
+275%
| 4−5
−275%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+108%
|
12−14
−108%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+238%
|
8−9
−238%
|
| Elden Ring | 40−45
+282%
|
10−12
−282%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+246%
|
12−14
−246%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+108%
|
12−14
−108%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+238%
|
8−9
−238%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+195%
|
18−20
−195%
|
| Metro Exodus | 44
+340%
|
10−11
−340%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 48
+243%
|
14−16
−243%
|
| Valorant | 47
+422%
|
9−10
−422%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+246%
|
12−14
−246%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+108%
|
12−14
−108%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+238%
|
8−9
−238%
|
| Dota 2 | 27
+92.9%
|
14−16
−92.9%
|
| Elden Ring | 40−45
+282%
|
10−12
−282%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 37
+60.9%
|
21−24
−60.9%
|
| Fortnite | 75−80
+200%
|
24−27
−200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+195%
|
18−20
−195%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 41
+193%
|
14−16
−193%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30
+200%
|
10−11
−200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 129
+231%
|
35−40
−231%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 16
+14.3%
|
14−16
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+180%
|
14−16
−180%
|
| Valorant | 30
+233%
|
9−10
−233%
|
| World of Tanks | 180−190
+145%
|
75−80
−145%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+246%
|
12−14
−246%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 24−27
+108%
|
12−14
−108%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 27−30
+238%
|
8−9
−238%
|
| Dota 2 | 50−55
+213%
|
16−18
−213%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 51
+122%
|
21−24
−122%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+195%
|
18−20
−195%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 100−110
+159%
|
35−40
−159%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+511%
|
9−10
−511%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
| Elden Ring | 21−24
+320%
|
5−6
−320%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 62
+107%
|
30−33
−107%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| World of Tanks | 95−100
+206%
|
30−35
−206%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
+367%
|
6−7
−367%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14
+33.3%
|
9−10
−33.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11
+233%
|
3−4
−233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 32
+220%
|
10−11
−220%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+450%
|
6−7
−450%
|
| Metro Exodus | 27
+1250%
|
2−3
−1250%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+183%
|
6−7
−183%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+162%
|
12−14
−162%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
| Dota 2 | 29
+81.3%
|
16−18
−81.3%
|
| Elden Ring | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 29
+81.3%
|
16−18
−81.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30
+131%
|
12−14
−131%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 29
+81.3%
|
16−18
−81.3%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
+225%
|
4−5
−225%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Dota 2 | 24−27
+213%
|
8−9
−213%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 15
+200%
|
5−6
−200%
|
| Fortnite | 16−18
+433%
|
3−4
−433%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+533%
|
3−4
−533%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+275%
|
4−5
−275%
|
This is how RX Vega M GL / 870 and UHD Graphics 750 compete in popular games:
- RX Vega M GL / 870 is 214% faster in 1080p
- RX Vega M GL / 870 is 211% faster in 1440p
- RX Vega M GL / 870 is 275% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega M GL / 870 is 1250% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RX Vega M GL / 870 surpassed UHD Graphics 750 in all 52 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 13.88 | 4.51 |
| Recency | 7 January 2018 | 30 March 2021 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
RX Vega M GL / 870 has a 207.8% higher aggregate performance score.
UHD Graphics 750, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, and 333.3% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 is our recommended choice as it beats the UHD Graphics 750 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon RX Vega M GL / 870 is a notebook card while UHD Graphics 750 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
