Radeon Vega 8 Embedded vs GeForce 320M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1220not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.64no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameC89Raven
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 April 2010 (14 years ago)19 April 2018 (6 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 cores48512
Core clock speed450 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1101 MHz
Number of transistors486 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate7.20035.23
Floating-point processing power0.0912 TFLOPS1.127 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs1632

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 x16IGP
Widthno dataIGP
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.16.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 April 2010 19 April 2018
Chip lithography 40 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 35 Watt

GeForce 320M has 52.2% lower power consumption.

Vega 8 Embedded, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 320M and Radeon Vega 8 Embedded. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 320M is a notebook card while Radeon Vega 8 Embedded 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
AMD Radeon Vega 8 Embedded
Radeon Vega 8 Embedded

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 52 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 115 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 8 Embedded 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.