AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 Mobile

The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 Mobile is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) built on the Picasso-M chip, employing the GCN 5.0 architecture. Fabricated on GlobalFoundries' 12 nm process, it integrates 4,940 million transistors within a 210 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per square millimeter. The GPU operates with a base clock of 300 MHz and a boost clock of 1400 MHz, driving 704 shading units, 44 texture mapping units, and 8 raster output units. It holds the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, indicating a median position. The product was released on October 21, 2019, and is now end-of-life. Its TDP is 15 W, and it is designed for portable devices, with all memory resources shared with the host system.

Benchmark Performance

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for this GPU, so performance assessment must rely on theoretical peak rates and architectural characteristics. The FP32 compute rate is 1.971 TFLOPS, derived from the 704 shading units at the 1400 MHz boost clock. This places the GPU in a modest performance tier. The FP16 rate is 3.942 TFLOPS, achieved via a 2:1 ratio, indicating a packed math path that can double throughput for compatible workloads. The texture fill rate is 61.60 GTexel/s, while the pixel fill rate is 11.20 GPixel/s. The 8 ROPs are a significant constraint, as they limit the pixel throughput. With a 50th percentile ranking, the GPU sits exactly in the middle of the database's GPU distribution. However, without nearest rival scores or delta percentages, it is impossible to quantify its lead or deficit relative to specific competitors. The theoretical rates suggest that the GPU is balanced for its intended mobile IGP role, but the low ROP count and shared memory will bottleneck high-resolution fill-rate tasks. The base clock of 300 MHz is quite low, but the boost clock of 1400 MHz provides a wide dynamic range for power management. The 12 nm process and 4,940 million transistors are part of the Picasso-M chip, which integrates the GPU into the host processor. The FP16 to FP32 ratio of 2:1 indicates that the hardware supports packed math operations, which can be leveraged in compute workloads that use half-precision. The pixel rate of 11.20 GPixel/s is directly tied to the 8 ROPs and the boost clock, meaning that any increase in resolution or anti-aliasing will quickly saturate this pipeline.

Who Should Consider It

The Radeon RX Vega 11 Mobile is an integrated GPU with a 15 W TDP, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops and other portable devices where discrete graphics are not feasible. The 8 ROPs and 44 TMUs indicate a design focused on basic 3D rendering and media tasks rather than high-end gaming. The pixel rate of 11.20 GPixel/s and texture rate of 61.60 GTexel/s provide enough throughput for modest resolutions and reduced detail settings. The GPU supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3, ensuring compatibility with modern game APIs and applications. However, the system-shared memory means that performance is heavily dependent on the host system's RAM configuration. For users running legacy software or light workloads, this GPU can handle everyday tasks and older titles. The end-of-life status suggests that it is found in older laptops, so it is best suited for users who do not require high frame rates at high resolutions. The 704 shading units are sufficient for entry-level compute tasks, but the 8 ROPs will limit anti-aliasing and high-resolution rendering. Given the lack of benchmark scores, the recommendation is to use this GPU for basic productivity, video playback, and light gaming at conservative settings. The FP32 throughput of 1.971 TFLOPS is adequate for shader-bound scenes, but the fill-rate limits will show in complex effects. Users should expect to lower resolution and detail settings to achieve playable frame rates in 3D applications.

Memory Subsystem

The memory subsystem is entirely system-shared, with the size, type, bus width, and bandwidth all listed as "System Shared" or "System Dependent". This means the GPU does not have a dedicated VRAM pool; instead, it uses a portion of the system's main memory. The effective bandwidth is determined by the host system's memory configuration, including the number of channels and the memory clock speed. This is a critical factor for high-resolution performance, as the GPU must compete with the CPU for memory access. The lack of a dedicated bus width means the GPU's memory interface is whatever the system provides, and the data does not specify a fixed value. Without a specific bandwidth figure, the data shows that the GPU's memory performance is not fixed but varies with the system. For high resolutions, the shared memory can become a bottleneck, especially when the system memory is not running in an optimal configuration. The 8 ROPs also require memory bandwidth to write pixels to the framebuffer, so the system-dependent bandwidth directly impacts fill-rate-limited scenarios. Users should be aware that the GPU's performance will scale with the quality of the system's memory subsystem. The absence of a dedicated VRAM size means that texture-heavy games may experience stuttering if the system memory is insufficient or slow. The "System Shared" designation for the bus width indicates that the GPU relies entirely on the host's memory interface, which is typically a single channel in many low-power mobile designs, further limiting bandwidth.

Power and Cooling

The TDP is specified as 15 W, which is the total power draw for the graphics portion of the integrated processor. The power connectors are listed as "None", and the slot width is "IGP", confirming that this is an integrated GPU with no auxiliary power requirements. The suggested PSU is null because it is not a discrete card; it draws power from the host system's motherboard and processor power delivery. The 12 nm process and 4,940 million transistors are part of the Picasso-M SoC, which shares power with the CPU cores. The base clock of 300 MHz and boost clock of 1400 MHz indicate a wide power state range, allowing the GPU to idle at very low power and boost under load. The 15 W TDP is relatively low, making it suitable for passive cooling solutions in some designs, but the actual cooling depends on the laptop's thermal solution. Since there are no power connectors, installation is not applicable; the GPU is soldered to the motherboard. The end-of-life status means that replacement parts are not produced, but the power characteristics remain relevant for understanding the thermal envelope of the host device. The data shows no PSU recommendation, which is consistent with an IGP that does not require a separate power supply. The 15 W envelope is shared with the CPU, so sustained boost clocks may be limited by the total system power budget, particularly in thermally constrained chassis.

How It Compares

The nearestRivals field in the data is empty, meaning there are no direct competitor scores or delta percentages available for this GPU. Consequently, a quantitative comparison against specific rival products cannot be made from the provided information. The percentile of 50 indicates that the GPU sits at the median of the entire GPU database, but without rival names or scores, this percentile cannot be translated into specific leads or deficits. The product's predecessor is the GCN 3.0 IGP, and its successor is the Navi II IGP, but no performance data for these is provided. The GPU's own characteristics—704 shading units, 44 TMUs, 8 ROPs, and a 15 W TDP—define its position as a low-power integrated solution. It is an end-of-life part, so it would historically compete with other mobile IGPs from the same era, but such data is absent. The lack of benchmark scores further limits comparative analysis. Therefore, the position of this GPU must be understood through its theoretical rates and architectural design rather than through direct rival measurements. The 50th percentile is a broad indicator, but without a distribution of scores, it offers limited actionable insight. In summary, the data does not support a rival-by-rival breakdown; the GPU's performance is best evaluated on its own merits. The absence of a nearestRivals list means that any claims of superiority or inferiority to specific products would be unfounded, and the analysis must remain within the bounds of the provided specification.