GeForce RTX 4050 vs Radeon Graphics 320SP

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated122
Place by popularitynot in top-10041
Power efficiencyno data26.11
ArchitectureGCN 5.1 (2018−2022)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameRenoirAD107
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date6 January 2020 (4 years ago)2023 (1 year 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 cores3202560
Core clock speed400 MHz2505 MHz
Boost clock speed1400 MHz2640 MHz
Number of transistors9,800 million18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate28.00211.2
Floating-point processing power0.896 TFLOPS13.52 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs2080
Tensor Coresno data120
Ray Tracing Coresno data18

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x8
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 12-pin

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 SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared6 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared96 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data216.0 GB/s
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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)6.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA-8.9

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 7 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 100 Watt

Graphics 320SP has 566.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 4050, on the other hand, has a 40% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Graphics 320SP and GeForce RTX 4050. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Graphics 320SP is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 4050 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.


AMD Radeon Graphics 320SP
Radeon Graphics 320SP
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050
GeForce RTX 4050

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.


4.3 3 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics 320SP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 1962 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4050 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.