RTX A500 Mobile vs GeForce GT 325M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 325M with RTX A500 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

GT 325M
2010
1 GB DDR3, 23 Watt
0.38

RTX A500 Mobile outperforms GT 325M by a whopping 3839% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1265331
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.3119.83
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGT216GA107S
Market segmentLaptopMobile workstation
Release date10 January 2010 (15 years ago)22 March 2022 (2 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 cores482048
Core clock speed450 MHz832 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1537 MHz
Number of transistors486 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt60 Watt (20 - 60 Watt TGP)
Texture fill rate7.20098.37
Floating-point processing power0.09504 TFLOPS6.296 TFLOPS
Gigaflops142no data
ROPs848
TMUs1664
Tensor Coresno data64
Ray Tracing Coresno data16

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
SLI options+-

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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth22.4 GB/s96 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIDisplayPortHDMIVGASingle Link DVINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.6
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+8.6
DLSS-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GT 325M 0.38
RTX A500 Mobile 14.97
+3839%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GT 325M 169
RTX A500 Mobile 6689
+3858%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

GT 325M 2161
RTX A500 Mobile 40923
+1794%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD1−2
−4200%
43
+4200%
1440p0−123
4K-0−14

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2000%
40−45
+2000%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2000%
40−45
+2000%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2167%
65−70
+2167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
Valorant 27−30
−378%
120−130
+378%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
−2000%
40−45
+2000%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
−1300%
210−220
+1300%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%
Dota 2 10−11
−890%
95−100
+890%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2167%
65−70
+2167%
Metro Exodus 0−1 30−35
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1275%
55
+1275%
Valorant 27−30
−378%
120−130
+378%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3300%
30−35
+3300%
Dota 2 10−11
−890%
95−100
+890%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2167%
65−70
+2167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−757%
60−65
+757%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−625%
29
+625%
Valorant 27−30
−378%
120−130
+378%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 1−2
−11900%
120−130
+11900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−3825%
150−160
+3825%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 14−16
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−4000%
40−45
+4000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 24−27

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 35−40

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−100%
30−33
+100%
Valorant 3−4
−2933%
90−95
+2933%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
−1600%
16−18
+1600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 54
+0%
54
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 48
+0%
48
+0%
Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 66
+0%
66
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Far Cry 5 44
+0%
44
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30
+0%
30
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

This is how GT 325M and RTX A500 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX A500 Mobile is 4200% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX A500 Mobile is 11900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX A500 Mobile is ahead in 29 tests (49%)
  • there's a draw in 30 tests (51%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.38 14.97
Recency 10 January 2010 22 March 2022
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 60 Watt

GT 325M has 160.9% lower power consumption.

RTX A500 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 3839.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A500 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 325M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 325M is a notebook graphics card while RTX A500 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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 GT 325M
GeForce GT 325M
NVIDIA RTX A500 Mobile
RTX A500

Other comparisons

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.


2.5 12 votes

Rate GeForce GT 325M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 91 vote

Rate RTX A500 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 325M or RTX A500 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.