ATI Radeon IGP 340M vs ION 2

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13241552
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.11no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Rage 6 (2000−2007)
GPU code nameGT218RS200
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 June 2008 (16 years ago)5 October 2002 (22 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 cores162
Core clock speed500 MHz183 MHz
Boost clock speedno data180 MHz
Number of transistors260 million30 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm180 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Wattno data
Texture fill rate4.0000.37
Floating-point processing power0.03424 TFLOPSno data
ROPs42
TMUs82

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 x16AGP 4x
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++

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 and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)7.0
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.31.4
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.2-

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Valorant 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Valorant 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Valorant 24−27
+8.3%
24−27
−8.3%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 no data

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the ION 2 is 200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • ION 2 is ahead in 19 tests (90%)
  • there's a draw in 2 tests (10%)

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 June 2008 5 October 2002
Chip lithography 40 nm 180 nm

ION 2 has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 350% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between ION 2 and Radeon IGP 340M. We've got no test results to judge.

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 ION 2
ION 2
ATI Radeon IGP 340M
Radeon IGP 340M

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.


2.9 26 votes

Rate ION 2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Radeon IGP 340M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about ION 2 or Radeon IGP 340M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.