GeForce 320M vs GTX 960M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 960M with GeForce 320M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 960M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
8.75
+1520%

GTX 960M outperforms 320M by a whopping 1520% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4851215
Place by popularity93not in top-100
Power efficiency8.421.69
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGM107C89
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)1 April 2010 (14 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 cores64048
Core clock speed1096 MHz450 MHz
Boost clock speed1176 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate47.047.200
Floating-point processing power1.505 TFLOPS0.0912 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs4016

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 Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed2500 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth80 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
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
BatteryBoost+-
Ansel+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 960M 8.75
+1520%
GeForce 320M 0.54

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.

GTX 960M 3377
+1516%
GeForce 320M 209

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:

900p95
+1800%
5−6
−1800%
Full HD34
+61.9%
21
−61.9%
1440p140−1
4K130−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 25
+525%
4−5
−525%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Battlefield 5 30
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Far Cry 5 28
+2700%
1−2
−2700%
Far Cry New Dawn 31
+3000%
1−2
−3000%
Forza Horizon 4 84
+1580%
5−6
−1580%
Hitman 3 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+400%
10−11
−400%
Metro Exodus 31
+3000%
1−2
−3000%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 48
+700%
6−7
−700%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+96.7%
30−33
−96.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 31
+675%
4−5
−675%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Battlefield 5 23
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Far Cry 5 24
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Far Cry New Dawn 23
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Forza Horizon 4 71
+1675%
4−5
−1675%
Hitman 3 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+400%
10−11
−400%
Metro Exodus 26
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 73
+630%
10−11
−630%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+96.7%
30−33
−96.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 11
+175%
4−5
−175%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Far Cry 5 18
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Forza Horizon 4 25
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Hitman 3 16−18
+240%
5−6
−240%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+400%
10−11
−400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+383%
6−7
−383%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+40%
10−11
−40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+96.7%
30−33
−96.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+2300%
1−2
−2300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 10
+900%
1−2
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 45
+2150%
2−3
−2150%
Hitman 3 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Metro Exodus 15 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+5500%
1−2
−5500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 7 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+1650%
2−3
−1650%
Metro Exodus 8 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−12 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%

This is how GTX 960M and GeForce 320M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 960M is 1800% faster in 900p
  • GTX 960M is 62% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 960M is 5500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 960M surpassed GeForce 320M in all 35 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.75 0.54
Recency 13 March 2015 1 April 2010
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 23 Watt

GTX 960M has a 1520.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 320M, on the other hand, has 226.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 960M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 320M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 960M is a notebook card while GeForce 320M 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 GTX 960M
GeForce GTX 960M
NVIDIA GeForce 320M
GeForce 320M

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.


3.7 1029 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 960M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 52 votes

Rate GeForce 320M 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.