GMA X3100 vs GeForce 320M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking1226not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGT2xx (2009−2012)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameMCP89Broadwater
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 April 2010 (14 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores32no data
Core clock speed450 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors486 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate7.2004.000
Floating-point performance0.0912 gflopsno data

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 2.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeno dataSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
Shared memory+no data

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 graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_1)9.0c
Shader Model4.13.0
OpenGL3.32.0
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 April 2010 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 40 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 13 Watt

GeForce 320M has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 125% more advanced lithography process.

GMA X3100, on the other hand, has 76.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 320M and GMA X3100. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 320M is a notebook card while GMA X3100 is a desktop one.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 320M
GeForce 320M
Intel GMA X3100
GMA X3100

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.


3.5 51 vote

Rate GeForce 320M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 57 votes

Rate GMA X3100 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.