NVIDIA
GeForce GT 520 vs Radeon HD 6830M
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
AMD
Radeon HD 6830M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GT 520 and Radeon HD 6830M across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗GT 520 outperforms Radeon HD 6830M by ~3% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+3%
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 GT 520 (~24%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider GT 520
- Higher catalog performance index
- Lower stated power consumption
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 2.1 · Not supported
Reasons to consider Radeon HD 6830M
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.2 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIA
AMDPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3130
100100
10054
4343
Graphics card ranking
Positions 133–138of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
Radeon HD 6830M
180 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
31Better
30
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
29Better
28
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
26
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
52Better
42
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
USB Type-C
DirectX
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Max monitors
Max resolution
Memory type
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Thickness
Compute API
Launch price—
Shader units / coresBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAM
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory busBetter
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process node
Recommended PSU
Length
Die sizeBetter
Memory cache
HDMI
Transistor countBetter
Vulkan
DisplayPort
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares GT 520 and Radeon HD 6830M 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.
GT 520Radeon HD 6830M
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
155 FPS
151 FPS
1080p Ultra
109 FPS
106 FPS
1440p Ultra
59 FPS
57 FPS
4K Ultra
21 FPS
21 FPS
Counter-Strike 2GT 520155 FPSRadeon HD 6830M151 FPSGT 520109 FPSRadeon HD 6830M106 FPSGT 52059 FPSRadeon HD 6830M57 FPSGT 52021 FPSRadeon HD 6830M21 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077GT 520100 FPSRadeon HD 6830M98 FPSGT 52086 FPSRadeon HD 6830M84 FPSGT 52042 FPSRadeon HD 6830M42 FPSGT 52014 FPSRadeon HD 6830M14 FPS
Forza Horizon 5GT 520127 FPSRadeon HD 6830M123 FPSGT 52082 FPSRadeon HD 6830M80 FPSGT 52053 FPSRadeon HD 6830M52 FPSGT 52031 FPSRadeon HD 6830M30 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyGT 52082 FPSRadeon HD 6830M80 FPSGT 52069 FPSRadeon HD 6830M67 FPSGT 52038 FPSRadeon HD 6830M37 FPSGT 52014 FPSRadeon HD 6830M14 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10031303%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 10032306%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10034340%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 10043430%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
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 / 10036360%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 10036353%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10034340%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10038373%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 10035343%
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
DirectX11.011.0
VulkanVulkan 1.2 (driver support)Not supported
OpenGL4.64.4
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 2.1OpenCL 1.2
Architecture and release
ArchitectureFermi 2.0TeraScale 2
Process node40 nm40 nm
Release date20112011
Device classDesktopMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count292 million1040 millionBetter
Die size79 mm²Better166 mm²
Shader units / cores48800Better
Base clock810 MHzBetter575 MHz
Boost clock810 MHzBetter575 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 2x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length145 mmOEM dependent
ThicknessSingle-slotOEM dependent
Recommended PSU200 WOEM dependent
Power connectorNoneIntegrated laptop power
Display outputs and limits
HDMIHDMI 1.3aOEM dependent
DisplayPortBoard dependentOEM dependent
USB Type-CNoOEM dependent
Max monitors3OEM dependent
Max resolution2560 × 1600OEM dependent
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM1 GB DDR31 GB DDR3
Memory typeDDR3GDDR5 / DDR3
Memory bus64 bit128 bitBetter
TFLOPS0.1550.92Better
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 / 69
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 (3)
- · Record updated: products
- · 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: GT 520 or Radeon HD 6830M?+
GT 520 has the higher overall gaming score, while GT 520 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GT 520 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?+
GT 520 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
GT 520 offers more overall performance, while GT 520 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GT 520 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
GT 520 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
GT 520 leads in combined 1440p performance. GT 520 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
GT 520 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GT 520 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?+
GT 520 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 GT 520 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.