Radeon Graphics 320SP vs GMA X4500

VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGeneration 5.0 (2008)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameEaglelakeRenoir
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 June 2008 (16 years ago)6 January 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores80320
Core clock speed533 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1400 MHz
Number of transistorsno data9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate2.13228.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.896 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs420

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16IGP
WidthIGPIGP

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX10.012 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 June 2008 6 January 2020
Chip lithography 65 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 15 Watt

GMA X4500 has 15.4% lower power consumption.

Graphics 320SP, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GMA X4500 and Radeon Graphics 320SP. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel GMA X4500
GMA X4500
AMD Radeon Graphics 320SP
Radeon Graphics 320SP

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 330 votes

Rate GMA X4500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 3 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics 320SP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.