Notebookcheck Logo

AMD Radeon 880M

AMD Radeon 880M

The Radeon 880M is a fairly powerful RDNA 3.5 architecture iGPU that debuted in June 2024 and a direct successor to the Radeon 780M. It packs just a few differences under the hood, such as faster caches; its 12 CUs/WGPs (768 unified shaders) run at up to 2,900 MHz.

DX12 Ultimate, ray tracing, AI image generation and other modern features are all supported here, as are many popular video codecs including first and foremost AVC, HEVC, VP9 and AV1. The latest addition to that list, the VVC codec, is not HW-supported unlike it is with Intel Lunar Lake chips. Miracast and FreeSync support is present. The iGPU can drive up to 4 monitors simultaneously with resolutions as high as SUHD 4320p60.

RDNA 3.5-based GPUs are projected to be fully supported by AMD until some time in 2027.

Performance

With well over 30 fps in both Once Human and The First Descendant (1080p - Low), this iGPU is certainly fast enough for a fair bit of casual as well as competitive gaming.

Power consumption

Strix Point chips are a single-die design, meaning the iGPU is built with the same TSMC N4P process as the CPU cores for above average, as of late 2024, power efficiency.

The 880M delivers almost as much performance as an entry-level desktop graphics card while consuming just 10 W to 20 W of juice.

AMD Radeon 800M Series

Radeon 890M compare 1024 @ 2.9 GHz? Bit @ 7500 MHz
Radeon 880M 768 @ 2.9 GHz? Bit @ 7500 MHz
Radeon 860M compare 512 @ 2.9 GHz? Bit @ 7500 MHz
Radeon 840M compare 256 @ 2.9 GHz? Bit @ 7500 MHz
CodenameStrix Point
ArchitectureRDNA 3+
Pipelines768 - unified
Raytracing Cores12
Core Speed2900 (Boost) MHz
Memory Speed7500 MHz
Shared Memoryyes
APIDirectX 12_2
technology4 nm
PCIe4
Displays4 Displays (max.), HDMI 2.1, DisplayPort 2.1
FeaturesFreeSync, Miracast, SUHD 4320p60 resolution support, AVC/HEVC/VP9/AV1 encoding and decoding
Notebook Sizemedium sized
Date of Announcement02.06.2024
PredecessorRadeon 780M
CPU in Radeon 880MGPU Base SpeedGPU Boost / Turbo
AMD Ryzen AI 9 36510 x 2000 MHz, 54 W? MHz2900 MHz
AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 3608 x 2000 MHz, 28 W? MHz2900 MHz
min. - max.? MHz2900 MHz

Benchmarks

Performance Rating - 3DMark 11 + Fire Strike + Time Spy
3.5 pt (10%)
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Score
min: 2575     avg: 3461     median: 3604.5 (10%)     max: 3856 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Time Spy Graphics
min: 2300     avg: 3110     median: 3232 (7%)     max: 3464 Points
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Score
min: 29760     avg: 36151     median: 37724.5 (36%)     max: 39393 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Cloud Gate Graphics
min: 46354     avg: 53127     median: 54310.5 (13%)     max: 57533 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Score
min: 6861     avg: 8109     median: 8553.5 (13%)     max: 8919 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Fire Strike Standard Graphics
min: 7404     avg: 8774     median: 9295.5 (9%)     max: 9651 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Graphics
325996 Points (36%)
3DMark - 3DMark Wild Life Extreme Unlimited
7133 Points (8%)
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Score
min: 12015     avg: 13932     median: 14674.5 (18%)     max: 14998 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance GPU
min: 12321     avg: 14478     median: 15386.5 (12%)     max: 15744 Points
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 +
3DMark 06
min: 39128     avg: 44987     median: 44986.5 (59%)     max: 50845 Points
Unigine Valley 1.0 - Unigine Valley 1.0 DX
30.8 fps (9%)
Cinebench R10 Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) +
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit)
min: 22668     avg: 22959     median: 22959 (16%)     max: 23250 points
Cinebench R15
Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit +
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 OpenGL 64 Bit
min: 143.3     avg: 219.5     median: 241 (14%)     max: 257 fps
Cinebench R15 OpenGL Ref. Match 64 Bit +
Cinebench R15 - Cinebench R15 OpenGL Ref. Match 64 Bit
97.9 % (98%)
GFXBench - GFXBench 5.0 4K Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
min: 28.7     avg: 34.5     median: 36.4 (14%)     max: 38.3 fps
GFXBench - GFXBench 5.0 Aztec Ruins High Tier Offscreen
min: 67.1     avg: 74.6     median: 73.3 (13%)     max: 83.5 fps
Restrict / Search: Model: Max. age: years
GFXBench - GFXBench 5.0 Aztec Ruins Normal Tier Offscreen
min: 159.4     avg: 177.2     median: 178.3 (13%)     max: 194 fps
GFXBench - GFXBench Car Chase Offscreen
min: 174.5     avg: 199.3     median: 199.3 (19%)     max: 224 fps
GFXBench 3.1 - GFXBench Manhattan ES 3.1 Offscreen
min: 237.4     avg: 267.7     median: 267.7 (6%)     max: 298 fps
GFXBench 3.0 - GFXBench 3.0 Manhattan Offscreen
min: 303.6     avg: 343.8     median: 343.8 (14%)     max: 384 fps
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
GFXBench T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 +
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 - GFXBench T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
min: 522.8     avg: 634     median: 634.4 (5%)     max: 746 fps
Basemark GPU 1.2 - Basemark GPU 1.2 Vulkan Official Medium Offscreen 1080
min: 104.6     avg: 174.7     median: 104.6 (3%)     max: 315 fps
Basemark GPU 1.2 - Basemark GPU 1.2 Vulkan Official High Offscreen 2160
3.6 fps (1%)
Geekbench 6.4 - Geekbench 6.4 GPU OpenCL
min: 27595     avg: 33008     median: 33147.5 (9%)     max: 37458 points
Geekbench 6.4 - Geekbench 6.4 GPU Vulkan
min: 36750     avg: 39729     median: 40478 (10%)     max: 42000 points
LuxMark v2.0 64Bit - LuxMark v2.0 Room GPU
min: 825     avg: 1030     median: 1030 (4%)     max: 1235 Samples/s
LuxMark v2.0 64Bit - LuxMark v2.0 Sala GPU
min: 801     avg: 1072     median: 1072 (2%)     max: 1343 Samples/s
ComputeMark v2.1 - ComputeMark v2.1 Result
min: 6533     avg: 7730     median: 7730 (6%)     max: 8927 points
Power Consumption - Furmark Stress Test Power Consumption - external Monitor *
min: 32     avg: 60.5     median: 67 (9%)     max: 71 Watt
051015202530354045505560657075Tooltip
Power Consumption - The Witcher 3 Power Consumption - external Monitor *
72 Watt (10%)
051015202530354045505560657075Tooltip
Power Consumption - Power Efficiency - Witcher 3 ultra external Monitor
0.5 fps per Watt (40%)
Power Consumption - Cyberpunk 2077 Power Consumption 150cd *
min: 44.6     avg: 59.3     median: 61.8 (18%)     max: 79.8 Watt
05101520253035404550556065707580Tooltip
Power Consumption - Cyberpunk 2077 Power Consumption - external Monitor *
min: 39.4     avg: 60.4     median: 61.5 (8%)     max: 77.5 Watt
051015202530354045505560657075Tooltip
Power Consumption - Power Efficiency - Cyberpunk 2077 ultra
min: 0.3226     avg: 0.4     median: 0.4 (1%)     max: 0.504 fps per Watt
- Range of benchmark values
red legend - Average benchmark values
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance

Game Benchmarks

The following benchmarks stem from our benchmarks of review laptops. The performance depends on the used graphics memory, clock rate, processor, system settings, drivers, and operating systems. So the results don't have to be representative for all laptops with this GPU. For detailed information on the benchmark results, click on the fps number.

low 1920x1080 cinem.
14.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080 cinem.
13.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080 cinem.
11.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080 cinem.
8.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
36.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
25.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
22.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
20.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1920x1080
37.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
23.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
17.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
14.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
F1 24

F1 24

2024
low 1920x1080
57.2 63 81.2 95.2 ~ 74 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
53 54.7 69.9 82.7 ~ 65 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
39 50.8 50.8 59.5 ~ 50 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
8 11.8 12.1 14.4 ~ 12 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080
14.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
12.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
9.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
29.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
23.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
20.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
16  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
18.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
16.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
12.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
12.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
low 1920x1080
53.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
41.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
34.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
24.9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1920x1080
33  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
29  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
23  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
17  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
32  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
24.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
22.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
21.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
18.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
17  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
13.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
9.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
Palworld

Palworld

2024
low 1920x1080
54.9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
42.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
23.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
21.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
med. 1920x1080
168.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
128.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
120.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1920x1080
59.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
47.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
33.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
21.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1920x1080
60.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
43.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
38.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
28  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080
19  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
16  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
14  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
8.3  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
56  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
48  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
34  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
31  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1920x1080
15.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
13.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
12.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
19.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
17.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
15.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
10.9  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
83.3  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
54.6  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
30.8  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
23.4  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1920x1080
41  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
35  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
34  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
25  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1920x1080
95  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
70  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
45.6  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
32.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080
37.2 39 41.4 42.6 48 49.5 50.6 ~ 44 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
29.1 30.8 32.4 33 38.1 38.3 39.3 ~ 34 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
23.9 24.2 24.6 25.5 30.1 30.1 30.4 ~ 27 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
19.4 20 20.9 21 25.8 26.1 26.3 ~ 23 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
19.1  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
Additional Benchmarks
Low Preset (FSR off) 1280x720
81.8
79.9
Ray Tracing Ultra Preset (DLSS off) 1920x1080
7.7
30min Start Ultra Preset (FSR off) 1920x1080
22.7
23.4
17.9
24.8
22.4
25
low 1920x1080
31.1 32.7 41.1 41.9 44.1 45.9 49.3 ~ 41 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
23 24.4 32.7 33 34.2 36.1 38.2 ~ 32 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
19.6 20.3 27.2 27.7 27.9 29.9 31.2 ~ 26 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
17.6 19.7 26.6 27 27.1 28.9 30.9 ~ 25 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
Additional Benchmarks
Low Preset SMAA 1280x720
35.3
63.2
68.3
Lies of P

Lies of P

2023
low 1920x1080
43  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
37.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
30.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
28.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1920x1080
32  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
30  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
24  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
20  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
37.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
32.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
26.1  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
26  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
low 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
low 1920x1080
24.8  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
21  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
17.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
15.7  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
F1 23

F1 23

2023
low 1920x1080
79.9 94.3 ~ 87 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
84.7 90 ~ 87 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
57.1 61.8 ~ 59 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
12.2 14.4 ~ 13 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
0 (!)  fps    + Compare
low 1920x1080
61.2  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
46.2  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
36.5  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
36  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1920x1080
46.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
34  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
20.5  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
15.2  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings low.
Returnal

Returnal

2023
low 1920x1080
27  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
26  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
23  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
19  fps    + Compare
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
low 1920x1080
32.4  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
25  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
19.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
12.3  fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» The benchmarks indicate that the game is not playable in the tested settings.
F1 22

F1 22

2022
low 1920x1080
101.1  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
92.5  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
70.3  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
18.3  fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
11.2  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
Additional Benchmarks
Ultra Low Preset 16xAF TAA 1280x720
162.1
low 1920x1080
84.9  fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
61.4  fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
40.2  fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
31.9  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
Additional Benchmarks
Lowest Preset (DX12) 1280x720
167.2
Strange Brigade

Strange Brigade

2018
low 1280x720
156.1 175.5 177.5 191.4 192.9 196 ~ 182 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
64.2 72.8 73.8 77.4 79.7 80.3 ~ 75 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
53.7 60.6 62.9 66 67 68.2 ~ 63 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
44.2 49.9 52.9 55.7 56.7 57.1 ~ 53 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
35.7  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
Far Cry 5

Far Cry 5

2018
low 1280x720
69 76 90 95 102 ~ 86 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
med. 1920x1080
36 43 54 58 58 ~ 50 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
high 1920x1080
32 40 49 53 53 ~ 45 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
ultra 1920x1080
30 37 46 50 50 ~ 43 fps    + Compare + 📈 Graph
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1280x720
59.1 64.1 70.4 75.7 79.9 82.5 86 ~ 74 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
47.2 51.2 55.5 56.4 63.1 65.9 67 ~ 58 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
35.3 39.8 41.6 44.2 48.8 49.5 50.4 ~ 44 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
low 1280x720
66.5 78.1 79.7 83.1 87 90.5 91.8 ~ 82 fps    + Compare
med. 1920x1080
33.3 34.6 39.8 42 43.7 46 46.4 ~ 41 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
25.1 27.8 28.7 29.4 31.4 32 32.9 ~ 30 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
23.2  fps    + Compare
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings med..
low 1280x720
131 147.1 156.7 160.8 164.8 167.9 168.3 ~ 157 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
103.3 109.3 125 132.6 133.6 137.4 137.5 ~ 126 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
31.1 38.7 47.2 47.7 90.8 101.2 110.8 ~ 67 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
29 41.3 45.9 46.2 80.6 90.5 92.5 ~ 61 fps    + Compare
» With most tested laptops playable in detail settings ultra.
low 1024x768
156 176 ~ 166 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
51 55 ~ 53 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
31 34.6 ~ 33 fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
GTA V

GTA V

2015
low 1024x768
142.9 148.5 159.5 164.2 166.1 170.6 173.3 ~ 161 fps    + Compare
med. 1366x768
132 132.3 148.3 160.9 165 ~ 148 fps    + Compare
high 1920x1080
54.9 62.7 73.8 76.9 80.5 81 81.6 ~ 73 fps    + Compare
ultra 1920x1080
20.5 27.5 30.6 31.2 32.5 32.7 33.3 ~ 30 fps    + Compare
QHD 2560x1440
22.3  fps    + Compare
» With all tested laptops playable in detail settings high.
Additional Benchmarks
Normal/Off 4xAF 1920x1080
116
117.9
141.6
150.9
Lowest Settings possible 1920x1080
121.4
116.8
148.8
144.8
lowmed.highultraQHD4K
Star Wars Outlaws14.713.211.58.52
Once Human36.125.322.820.6
The First Descendant37.623.417.314.7
F1 2474655012
Senua's Saga Hellblade 214.612.39.2
Ghost of Tsushima29.323.720.216
Horizon Forbidden West18.816.612.512.4
Dragon's Dogma 2
Last Epoch53.841.334.724.9
Skull & Bones33292317
Helldivers 23224.622.721.1
Enshrouded18.41713.89.73
Palworld54.942.123.821.3
Prince of Persia The Lost Crown168.5128.6120.5
Ready or Not59.447.333.721.6
The Finals60.743.338.528
Avatar Frontiers of Pandora1916148.3
Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3 202356483431
Alan Wake 215.313.812.2
Lords of the Fallen19.617.115.210.9
Total War Pharaoh83.354.630.823.4
Assassin's Creed Mirage41353425
Counter-Strike 2957045.632.7
Cyberpunk 2077 2.2 Phantom Liberty4434272319.1
Baldur's Gate 341322625
Lies of P4337.530.128.3
The Crew Motorfest32302420
Armored Core 637.132.726.126
Atlas Fallen
Ratchet & Clank Rift Apart24.82117.515.7
F1 2387875913
Resident Evil 4 Remake
Company of Heroes 361.246.236.536
Atomic Heart46.23420.515.2
Returnal27262319
Hogwarts Legacy32.42519.312.3
F1 22101.192.570.318.311.2
Tiny Tina's Wonderlands84.961.440.231.9
Strange Brigade18275635335.7
Far Cry 586504543
X-Plane 11.11745844
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark82413023.2
Dota 2 Reborn1571266761
The Witcher 31665333
GTA V161148733022.3
lowmed.highultraQHD4K
< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps
10
16
11
4
15
17
6
3
21
16
4
1
28
8
1
1
4
1




For more games that might be playable and a list of all games and graphics cards visit our Gaming List

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

search for model:
v1.33
log 15. 13:50:01

#0 ran 0s before starting gpusingle class +0s ... 0s

#1 no ids found in url (should be separated by "_") +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Sun, 13 Jul 2025 05:36:21 +0200 +0.001s ... 0.001s

#4 composed specs +0.027s ... 0.028s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.028s

#6 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.028s

#7 getting avg benchmarks for device 12526 +0.025s ... 0.053s

#8 got single benchmarks 12526 +0.023s ... 0.076s

#9 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.076s

#10 min, max, avg, median took s +0.667s ... 0.743s

#11 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 0.743s

#12 Got 362 rows for game benchmarks. +0.057s ... 0.8s

#13 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 0.8s

#14 got data and put it in $dataArray +0.024s ... 0.824s

#15 benchmarks composed for output. +0.338s ... 1.162s

#16 return log +0.009s ... 1.171s

Notebook reviews with AMD Radeon 880M graphics card

The Prestige 16 AI+

MSI Prestige A16 AI+ review: Multimedia laptop with powerful Ryzen 9 365

Last year, MSI introduced the Prestige 16 laptop featuring the Core Ultra 155H processor. Now, an AMD-powered A16 variant has arrived, equipped with a Ryzen 9 p...
AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 | AMD Radeon 880M | 16.00" | 2 kg
Lenovo ThinkBook 16 G7+ review - A 16-inch multimedia laptop with AMD Zen 5 and a 3.2K display upgrade

Lenovo ThinkBook 16 G7+ review - A 16-inch multimedia laptop with AMD Zen 5 and a 3.2K display upgrade

With the ThinkBook 16 G7+, Lenovo is offering an upgraded version of the normal ThinkBook 16 with an AMD Zen 5 processor, significantly improved cooling, a larg...
AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 | AMD Radeon 880M | 16.00" | 1.9 kg
MSI Summit A16 AI Plus review: Powerful AMD Ryzen 9 convertible

MSI Summit A16 AI Plus review: Powerful AMD Ryzen 9 convertible

The MSI model is now one of the fastest 16-inch convertibles in the market when it comes to processor performance. However, its lack of discrete graphics option...
AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 | AMD Radeon 880M | 16.00" | 2.1 kg
Lenovo ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 laptop review: The AMD version returns with the Ryzen AI 7 Pro 360

Lenovo ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 laptop review: The AMD version returns with the Ryzen AI 7 Pro 360

After a year of absence from the ThinkPad T14s line, Lenovo's premium office line, AMD returns with Strix Point. The new Lenovo ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 AMD with the...
AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360 | AMD Radeon 880M | 14.00" | 1.3 kg
Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14 G9 review - The powerful multimedia laptop with AMD Zen 5 and 120-Hz OLED

Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14 G9 review - The powerful multimedia laptop with AMD Zen 5 and 120-Hz OLED

Lenovo has equipped its Yoga Pro 7 14 G9 with a new AMD Zen 5 processor in combination with a high-resolution 120-Hz OLED screen. Its performance is great and t...
AMD Ryzen AI 9 365 | AMD Radeon 880M | 14.50" | 1.5 kg

Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606WA-RK052W: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 16.00", 1.5 kg
  Review » Asus ZenBook S 16 OLED laptop review: Premiere for Ryzen AI 9 365 and Radeon 880M

Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA, Ryzen AI 9 365: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 14.00", 1.3 kg
  External Review » Asus VivoBook S 14 OLED M5406WA, Ryzen AI 9 365

MSI Summit A16 AI Plus A3HMTG: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 16.00", 2.1 kg
  External Review » MSI Summit A16 AI Plus A3HMTG

Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-61T: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 14.00", 1.3 kg
  External Review » Acer Swift 14 AI SF14-61T

Lenovo ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 21M2S00G00: AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, 14.00", 1.3 kg
  External Review » Lenovo ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 21M2S00G00

MSI Prestige A16 AI+ A3HMG-036: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 16.00", 2 kg
  External Review » MSI Prestige A16 AI+ A3HMG-036

Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 14.50", 1.5 kg
  External Review » Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9

Asus Vivobook S 16 M5606W: AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX 370, 16.00", 1.5 kg
  External Review » Asus Vivobook S 16 M5606W

Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606WA-RK052W: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 16.00", 1.5 kg
  External Review » Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606WA-RK052W

MSI Prestige A16 AI+ A3HMG-036: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 16.00", 2 kg
   » MSI Prestige A16 AI+ with 4K OLED and 32 GB RAM discounted by $400

Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606WA-RK052W: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 16.00", 1.5 kg
   » Slim Asus Zenbook S 16 laptop with 120 Hz OLED panel enjoys $300 discount vs list price

Lenovo ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 21M2S00G00: AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, 14.00", 1.3 kg
   » Lenovo ThinkPad T14s with 32GB RAM and Ryzen AI 7 Pro 360 now 54% off

   » AMD-powered Lenovo ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 with 32GB memory back on sale with 50% discount

Asus Zenbook S 16 UM5606WA-RK052W: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 16.00", 1.5 kg
   » "Open-Box Excellent" Asus Zenbook S 16 with Ryzen AI 9 365 APU and 120 Hz OLED panel is now enjoying 41% price cut

Lenovo ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 21M2S00G00: AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 360, 14.00", 1.3 kg
   » Lenovo ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 with 32GB RAM and AMD Ryzen AI 7 Pro 360 gets big 46% discount

   » AMD Ryzen AI 7 Pro 360 makes its review-debut in the Lenovo ThinkPad T14s Gen 6 AMD

Lenovo Yoga Pro 7 14ASP G9: AMD Ryzen AI 9 365, 14.50", 1.5 kg
   » Lenovo Yoga Pro 9i Gen 9 price drops by $300 for RTX 4060 SKU with 16-inch Mini-LED display

Please share our article, every link counts!
Mail Logo

» Comparison of GPUs
Detailed list of all laptop GPUs sorted by class and performance.

» Benchmark List
Sort and restrict laptop GPUs based on performance in synthetic benchmarks.

» Notebook Gaming List
Playable games for each graphics card and their average FPS results.

Class 1

Class 2

Radeon PRO W6600M *

Class 3

Arc Graphics 3-core (Arrow Lake) *
Arc Graphics 2-core (Arrow Lake) *
UHD Graphics 32EUs
UHD Graphics 750

Class 4

* Approximate position of the graphics adapter

Klaus Hinum (Update: 2024-09-15)