
Radeon 820M vs GRID M6-1Q

Radeon 820M
Popular choices:

GRID M6-1Q
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Radeon 820M is positioned at rank 62 and the GRID M6-1Q is on rank 326, so the Radeon 820M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon 820M
Performance Per Dollar GRID M6-1Q
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon 820M is significantly newer (2024 vs 2015). The Radeon 820M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GRID M6-1Q lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon 820M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.6% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GRID M6-1Q.
| Insight | Radeon 820M | GRID M6-1Q |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.6%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.6%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 3+ (2024) (4nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon 820M offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $25 versus $100 for the GRID M6-1Q, it costs 75% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 314.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon 820M | GRID M6-1Q |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+314.3%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($25) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($100) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon 820M and GRID M6-1Q

Radeon 820M
The Radeon 820M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 2 2024. It features the RDNA 3+ architecture. The boost clock speed is 2900 MHz. It has 128 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,143 points.

GRID M6-1Q
The GRID M6-1Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,069 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon 820M scores 2,143 and the GRID M6-1Q reaches 2,069 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon 820M is built on RDNA 3+ while the GRID M6-1Q uses Maxwell 2.0, both on 4 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 128 (Radeon 820M) vs 2,048 (GRID M6-1Q). Boost clocks: 2900 MHz vs 1178 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon 820M | GRID M6-1Q |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 2,143+4% | 2,069 |
| Architecture | RDNA 3+ | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 4 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 128 | 2048+1500% |
| Boost Clock | 2900 MHz+146% | 1178 MHz |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon 820M | GRID M6-1Q |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of video memory. Bus width: System vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon 820M | GRID M6-1Q |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | Shared | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | System | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (Radeon 820M) vs 12_1 (GRID M6-1Q). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 0.
| Feature | Radeon 820M | GRID M6-1Q |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate | 12_1 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 0 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon 820M draws 30W versus the GRID M6-1Q's 225W — a 152.9% difference. The Radeon 820M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon 820M) vs 350W (GRID M6-1Q). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 1mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Radeon 820M | GRID M6-1Q |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-87% | 225W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 1mm |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 80 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 71.4+676% | 9.2 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon 820M costs 75% less ($75 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 85.7 (Radeon 820M) vs 20.7 (GRID M6-1Q) — the Radeon 820M offers 314% better value. The Radeon 820M is the newer GPU (2024 vs 2015).
| Feature | Radeon 820M | GRID M6-1Q |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $1500 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $25-75% | $100 |
| Performance per Dollar | 85.7+314% | 20.7 |
| Codename | Krackan Point | GM204 |
| Release | June 2 2024 | August 30 2015 |
| Ranking | #669 | #525 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















