Radeon Graphics 320SP vs GeForce 920MX

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking796not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency12.18no data
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGM108Renoir
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date25 March 2016 (8 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 cores256320
Core clock speed965 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed993 MHz1400 MHz
Number of transistorsno data9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)16 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate23.8328.00
Floating-point processing power0.5084 TFLOPS0.896 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs2420

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8IGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3, GDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.7 (6.4)
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 25 March 2016 6 January 2020
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 16 Watt 15 Watt

Graphics 320SP has an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 6.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 920MX 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.


NVIDIA GeForce 920MX
GeForce 920MX
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.


3.1 1052 votes

Rate GeForce 920MX 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.