AMD
Radeon 520 vs GeForce Go 7300
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GeForce Go 7300
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon 520 and GeForce Go 7300 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗Radeon 520 outperforms GeForce Go 7300 by ~36% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+36%
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: Radeon 520 (~25%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider Radeon 520
- Higher catalog performance index
- Higher catalog value index
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.0 / DirectCompute 5.0 · Not supported
Reasons to consider GeForce Go 7300
- Recorded feature support: CUDA / OpenCL 1.x · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
AMD
NVIDIAPerformance
Price / performance
3828
6564
Graphics card ranking
Positions 121–126of 411
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce Go 7300
128 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
38Better
28
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
34Better
27
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
31Better
24
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
33Better
25
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
40Better
32
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
HDMI
DisplayPort
Power consumption——
Architecture
Memory type
Launch price——
Clock speed—
Memory frequency—
Memory bandwidth—
Power consumption——
Process node—
Release date
Device class
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
Recommended PSU
Length
Thickness
Transistor count
Die size
Shader units / cores
Memory cache
Power connector
Compute API
Base clock
Upscaling
Boost clock
Interface
VRAM
Memory bus
TFLOPS
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares Radeon 520 and GeForce Go 7300 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.
Radeon 520GeForce Go 7300
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
157 FPS
143 FPS
1080p Ultra
111 FPS
101 FPS
1440p Ultra
86 FPS
54 FPS
4K Ultra
43 FPS
19 FPS
Counter-Strike 2Radeon 520157 FPSGeForce Go 7300143 FPSRadeon 520111 FPSGeForce Go 7300101 FPSRadeon 52086 FPSGeForce Go 730054 FPSRadeon 52043 FPSGeForce Go 730019 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077Radeon 520102 FPSGeForce Go 730093 FPSRadeon 52088 FPSGeForce Go 730080 FPSRadeon 52062 FPSGeForce Go 730039 FPSRadeon 52029 FPSGeForce Go 730013 FPS
Forza Horizon 5Radeon 520128 FPSGeForce Go 7300117 FPSRadeon 52083 FPSGeForce Go 730076 FPSRadeon 52077 FPSGeForce Go 730049 FPSRadeon 52063 FPSGeForce Go 730029 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyRadeon 52083 FPSGeForce Go 730076 FPSRadeon 52069 FPSGeForce Go 730063 FPSRadeon 52056 FPSGeForce Go 730035 FPSRadeon 52029 FPSGeForce Go 730013 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100382830%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100382830%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100383217%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100043200%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 100000%
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 / 10038358%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100383411%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100383217%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 10038365%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100383314%
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
DirectX12.09.3
Vulkan1.2Not supported
OpenGL4.62.1
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 2.0 / DirectCompute 5.0CUDA / OpenCL 1.x
Architecture and release
ArchitecturePolarisCurie
Process node—90 nm
Release date20172006
Device classMobileMobile
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor countNot publicly specified112 million
Die sizeNot publicly specified81 mm²
Shader units / coresNot publicly specifiedNot publicly specified
Base clockOEM/TGP dependent350 MHz
Boost clockOEM/TGP dependent350 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfaceOEM platform dependentPCIe 1.0 x16
LengthOEM dependentOEM dependent
ThicknessOEM dependentOEM dependent
Recommended PSUOEM dependentOEM dependent
Power connectorIntegrated laptop powerNone
Display outputs and limits
HDMIOEM dependentOEM dependent
DisplayPortOEM dependentOEM dependent
USB Type-COEM dependentOEM dependent
Max monitorsOEM dependentOEM dependent
Max resolutionOEM dependentOEM dependent
Memory and compute throughput
VRAMOEM configuration dependent0.064 GB GDDR3
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR3 / DDR2
Memory busOEM configuration dependent64 bit
TFLOPSOEM/TGP dependentNot published (legacy architecture)
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 / 60
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 (2)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (2)
- · 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: Radeon 520 or GeForce Go 7300?+
Radeon 520 has the higher overall gaming score, while Radeon 520 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GeForce Go 7300 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?+
GeForce Go 7300 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
Radeon 520 offers more overall performance, while Radeon 520 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GeForce Go 7300 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
Radeon 520 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
Radeon 520 leads in combined 1440p performance. Radeon 520 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
Radeon 520 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
Radeon 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?+
Radeon 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 Radeon 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.