NVIDIA
GeForce 210 vs Radeon RX Vega 56
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
RX Vega 56
Aggregate performance score
We've compared 210 and RX Vega 56 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗RX Vega 56 outperforms 210 by ~45% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+45%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: GeForce 210 (~11%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider 210
- Lower stated power consumption
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.2 · Not supported
Reasons to consider RX Vega 56
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIA
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3145
10071
10056
4368
Graphics card ranking
Positions 105–110of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Radeon RX Vega 56
105 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
31
45Better
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29
39Better
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
26
36Better
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100Better
71
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
52Better
47
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Release date
ArchitectureBetter
Thickness
Compute API
Launch priceBetter
Max monitors
Max resolution
Shader units / coresBetter
Recommended PSUBetter
LengthBetter
Die sizeBetter
Memory cacheBetter
Transistor countBetter
USB Type-C
DisplayPort
Device class
DirectX
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Memory type
Power connector
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Upscaling
Vulkan
HDMI
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares 210 and RX Vega 56 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
210RX Vega 56
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
154 FPS
201 FPS
1080p Ultra
108 FPS
141 FPS
1440p Ultra
58 FPS
110 FPS
4K Ultra
21 FPS
39 FPS
Counter-Strike 2210154 FPSRX Vega 56201 FPS210108 FPSRX Vega 56141 FPS21058 FPSRX Vega 56110 FPS21021 FPSRX Vega 5639 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077210100 FPSRX Vega 56129 FPS21086 FPSRX Vega 56112 FPS21042 FPSRX Vega 5679 FPS21014 FPSRX Vega 5626 FPS
Forza Horizon 5210126 FPSRX Vega 56163 FPS21081 FPSRX Vega 56106 FPS21052 FPSRX Vega 5699 FPS21031 FPSRX Vega 5658 FPS
Hogwarts Legacy21081 FPSRX Vega 56106 FPS21068 FPSRX Vega 5688 FPS21038 FPSRX Vega 5671 FPS21014 FPSRX Vega 5627 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100314537%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100314945%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100345242%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100436845%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001007134%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100365542%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100365440%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100345242%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100385842%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100355239%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX10.112.1
VulkanNot supported1.3
OpenGL3.34.6
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.2OpenCL 2.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureTesla 2.0GCN 5.0Better
Process node40 nm14 nmBetter
Release date20092017
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count260 million12500 millionBetter
Die size57 mm²Better495 mm²
Shader units / cores163584Better
Base clock589 MHz1156 MHzBetter
Boost clock589 MHz1471 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 2x16PCIe 3x16
Length168 mmBetter280 mm
ThicknessSingle-slotDual-slot
Recommended PSU200 WBetter550 W
Power connectorNone8+8 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIBoard dependentHDMI 2.0b
DisplayPortDisplayPortDisplayPort 1.4a
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors34
Max resolution4096 × 21607680 × 4320
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM1 GB DDR38 GB HBM2Better
Memory typeDDR3HBM2
Memory bus64 bit2048 bitBetter
TFLOPS0.03910.54Better
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 70
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (4)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (5)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record changed: product_prices
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: 210 or RX Vega 56?+
210 has the higher overall gaming score, while 210 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
210 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
210 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
210 offers more overall performance, while 210 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
210 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
210 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
210 leads in combined 1440p performance. 210 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
210 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
210 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
210 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to 210 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.