AMD Radeon HD 7950 vs AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data presents an unusual comparison, as the two cards were tested under different benchmark suites. The AMD Radeon HD 7950 has a single recorded Geekbench Metal score of 33,951, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH has Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan scores of 27,125 and 31,268 respectively. The database shows no direct head-to-head benchmark entries between these two cards, so the comparison relies on their respective average scores and percentile standings.

The HD 7950 achieves an average benchmark score of 33,951, placing it in the 78th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The RX Vega M GH averages 29,197 across its two recorded tests, placing it in the 74th percentile. This represents a 16.3% advantage for the older card in average score, though the different test methodologies warrant caution in direct interpretation. The HD 7950's Metal score is particularly strong, suggesting that in Metal-based workloads the GCN 1.0 architecture performs competitively even against much newer hardware.

Looking at the nearest rivals for the HD 7950, the data shows it sits within a narrow band of performance. It trails the AMD Radeon RX 480 by just 0.1%, with that card scoring 33,997. The HD 7950 beats the AMD Radeon RX 7700S by 0.3% (33,849) and the AMD Radeon RX 560 XT by 0.5% (34,133). It also trails the NVIDIA RTX A2000 12 GB by 0.6%, which scored 34,154. These margins are remarkably tight, placing the HD 7950 in a performance cluster where differences are essentially negligible in real-world terms.

The RX Vega M GH's nearest rivals tell a similar story of tight clustering. It trails the AMD FirePro W8000 by 0.0% (29,211), edges out the Intel Arc A370M by 0.1% (29,175), beats the AMD Radeon RX 470 by 0.7% (28,996), and sits 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (28,874). This places the Vega M GH in a performance tier roughly 14% below the HD 7950's cluster, based on the average scores. The RX 6800M comparison is notable, as that is a high-end mobile GPU that the Vega M GH actually outperforms by 1.1% in the recorded data, despite the Vega M GH being an integrated processor graphics solution.

In terms of individual workload strengths, the HD 7950's Metal score of 33,951 demonstrates that its 2.867 TFLOPS FP32 throughput, combined with its 240.0 GB/s memory bandwidth, remains effective for Apple's Metal API. The Vega M GH's Vulkan score of 31,268 is its stronger result, outperforming its OpenCL score of 27,125 by 15.3%. This suggests the GCN 4.0 architecture with Vulkan 1.3 support handles modern graphics APIs more efficiently than OpenCL in the recorded tests. The Vega M GH's higher theoretical FP32 of 3.656 TFLOPS does not translate into proportionally higher benchmark scores, indicating that the HD 7950's 384-bit memory bus and 240.0 GB/s bandwidth offer advantages in certain memory-intensive workloads.

The percentile data reinforces the performance gap. The HD 7950 sits 4 percentile points higher than the Vega M GH, which aligns with the 16.3% average score advantage. However, the different benchmark suites mean these figures should be viewed as indicative rather than definitive. The HD 7950's single test result provides less statistical confidence than the Vega M GH's two recorded tests, though the database treats both as valid measurements.

FAQ

Q: Which card has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 7950 has an average benchmark score of 33,951, while the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH averages 29,197. This gives the HD 7950 a 16.3% advantage in average score.

Q: How does the HD 7950 compare to its closest rival, the RX 480?

A: The HD 7950 scores 33,951 against the RX 480's 33,997, a delta of -0.1%. The two cards are effectively tied in the recorded data.

Q: Does the RX Vega M GH outperform any notable mobile GPUs?

A: Yes, the Vega M GH scores 29,197 on average, which is 1.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 6800M (28,874) and 0.1% ahead of the Intel Arc A370M (29,175).

Q: Which API scores are recorded for the RX Vega M GH?

A: The Vega M GH has a Geekbench OpenCL score of 27,125 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 31,268. Its Vulkan result is 15.3% higher than its OpenCL result.

Q: What is the percentile ranking difference between the two cards?

A: The HD 7950 ranks in the 78th percentile of all GPUs, while the RX Vega M GH ranks in the 74th percentile, a difference of 4 percentile points.

Q: Are there direct head-to-head benchmark results between these two cards?

A: No, the database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries. The comparison relies on each card's separate average scores and nearest rival data.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon HD 7950 is the clear winner in overall benchmark performance, with its 33,951 average score outpacing the Vega M GH's 29,197 by a substantial margin. This makes it the better choice for applications that rely on Metal API performance, as its recorded Metal score of 33,951 demonstrates strong compatibility with that ecosystem. The HD 7950's 78th percentile ranking also indicates it sits higher in the overall GPU hierarchy than the Vega M GH's 74th percentile.

The HD 7950's performance cluster is particularly notable. Being within 0.6% of the RX 480, RX 7700S, RX 560 XT, and RTX A2000 12 GB means it competes with GPUs from much later generations. For users with workloads that leverage the HD 7950's 3 GB GDDR5 memory on a 384-bit bus, the 240.0 GB/s bandwidth provides a significant advantage for memory-heavy tasks.

The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH wins in specific areas despite its lower average score. Its Vulkan score of 31,268 shows that in Vulkan-based workloads, it closes much of the gap with the HD 7950, reaching 92.1% of the HD 7950's average score. The Vega M GH also offers superior pixel processing capabilities with a 76.16 GPixel/s pixel rate compared to the HD 7950's 25.60 GPixel/s, making it potentially better suited for resolutions and settings that stress fill-rate limits.

The Vega M GH's advantage extends to power efficiency, with a 100 W TDP versus the HD 7950's 200 W. This makes it the preferred option for compact or portable systems where thermal and power constraints are primary considerations. Its IGP form factor means it is designed for integration into processors, which suits small-form-factor builds even though it cannot be installed as a discrete card.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ substantially in their core specifications. The HD 7950 uses 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs, while the Vega M GH uses 1,536 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 64 ROPs. The Vega M GH has fewer shaders and TMUs but double the ROP count, which explains its higher pixel rate of 76.16 GPixel/s versus 25.60 GPixel/s.

Memory configurations differ significantly. The HD 7950 has 3 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus with 240.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the Vega M GH has 4 GB of HBM2 on a 1024-bit bus with 204.8 GB/s bandwidth. Despite the wider bus, the Vega M GH's lower effective memory speed of 1600 Mbps results in less bandwidth than the HD 7950's 5 Gbps effective GDDR5.

Clock speeds are only recorded for the Vega M GH, with base and boost clocks of 1063 MHz and 1190 MHz respectively. The HD 7950's base and boost clocks are not listed in the database, though its memory runs at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) compared to the Vega M GH's 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective). The Vega M GH achieves higher FP32 throughput at 3.656 TFLOPS versus 2.867 TFLOPS, and also has FP16 capability at 3.656 TFLOPS with 1:1 ratio, while the HD 7950 has no recorded FP16 performance.

Power and physical specifications differ markedly. The HD 7950 has a 200 W TDP, requires dual-slot cooling, uses 2x 6-pin power connectors, and needs a 550 W suggested PSU. The Vega M GH has a 100 W TDP, uses an IGP form factor with no separate power connectors, and has no suggested PSU requirement. The HD 7950 measures 278 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 38 mm in width, while the Vega M GH has no recorded dimensions due to its integrated nature.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these cards spans two generations of GCN. The HD 7950 uses the Tahiti chip based on GCN 1.0 architecture, belonging to the Southern Islands generation (HD 7900 series). The Vega M GH uses the Polaris 22 chip based on GCN 4.0, belonging to the Vega (Vega M) generation. This represents a generational leap in instruction set efficiency and feature support.

The manufacturing processes differ significantly. The HD 7950 is built on a 28 nm process at TSMC with 4,313 million transistors on a 352 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.3 million per mm². The Vega M GH uses a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries with 5,000 million transistors on a 208 mm² die, achieving a much higher transistor density of 24.0 million per mm². The Vega M GH packs more transistors into a substantially smaller die.

API support reveals the newer card's advantages. The HD 7950 supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Vega M GH supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The higher DirectX version and newer Vulkan specification on the Vega M GH provide improved compatibility with modern graphics applications. Both cards lack ray tracing and tensor cores.

The HD 7950 uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface and provides display outputs of 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2. The Vega M GH uses an IGP bus interface with display outputs described as portable device dependent, reflecting its design for integrated use in laptops and compact systems. The HD 7950 was released on 2012-01-30, while the Vega M GH came later on 2018-01-31, and both are now end-of-life products.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear performance hierarchy. The AMD Radeon HD 7950 should be chosen by users seeking maximum compute performance in the recorded benchmarks. Its 33,951 average score, 78th percentile ranking, and competitive positioning within 0.6% of much newer discrete GPUs like the RX 480 and RX 7700S make it the stronger option for raw throughput. The Metal benchmark result is particularly compelling for users in Apple-centric workflows.

The AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH should be chosen by users who prioritize power efficiency and modern API support. Its 100 W TDP, half that of the HD 7950, combined with Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_0) support, makes it suitable for modern software environments where power constraints matter. Its 92.1% of the HD 7950's average score in Vulkan testing shows that for Vulkan-specific workloads, the gap narrows considerably.

The HD 7950 offers double the memory bandwidth at 240.0 GB/s versus 204.8 GB/s, which benefits memory-intensive workloads, while the Vega M GH counters with 4 GB of HBM2 memory compared to 3 GB of GDDR5. The Vega M GH's higher FP32 throughput of 3.656 TFLOPS and its FP16 capability provide theoretical compute advantages that the benchmark data does not fully reflect.

For users building a desktop system with available space for a 278 mm dual-slot card and 550 W PSU, the HD 7950 delivers superior benchmark performance. For users seeking an integrated solution that consumes less power and supports newer APIs, the Vega M GH is the data-supported choice. The 4 percentile point gap in overall GPU ranking confirms the HD 7950 as the higher-performing card, though the Vega M GH's specific advantages in fill rate, efficiency, and API currency make it the better fit for portable and power-sensitive applications.