ATI Radeon IGP 320 vs Iris Pro Graphics 5200

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking764not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency7.11no data
ArchitectureGeneration 7.5 (2013)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameHaswell GT3eRS100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date27 May 2013 (11 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 cores320no data
Core clock speed200 MHz160 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistors392 million30 million
Manufacturing process technology22 nm180 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Wattno data
Texture fill rate48.000.16
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPSno data
ROPs41
TMUs401

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
InterfaceRing BusAGP 4x
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 shared + 128 MB eDRAMSystem 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)7.0
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.31.4
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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.

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 1181
+39267%
ATI IGP 320 3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 May 2013 5 October 2002
Chip lithography 22 nm 180 nm

Iris Pro Graphics 5200 has an age advantage of 10 years, and a 718.2% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Iris Pro Graphics 5200 and Radeon IGP 320. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Iris Pro Graphics 5200 is a notebook card while Radeon IGP 320 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.


Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200
Iris Pro Graphics 5200
ATI Radeon IGP 320
Radeon IGP 320

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.


2.8 162 votes

Rate Iris Pro Graphics 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Radeon IGP 320 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.