Radeon RX 6750 GRE vs ATI IGP 340M

#ad 
Buy
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking154388
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data42.82
Power efficiencyno data12.10
ArchitectureRage 6 (2000−2007)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameRS200Navi 22
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date5 October 2002 (22 years ago)17 October 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$549

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores22560
Core clock speed183 MHzno data
Boost clock speed180 MHz2581 MHz
Number of transistors30 million17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology180 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data250 Watt
Texture fill rate0.37413.0
ROPs264
TMUs2160

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).

InterfaceAGP 4xPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin + 1x 8-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 Shared12 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared192 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared18 GB/s
Memory bandwidthno data432.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX7.012 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGL1.44.6
OpenCLN/A2.1
VulkanN/A1.3

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.

ATI IGP 340M 2
RX 6750 GRE 17101
+854950%

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 1−2 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7 no data
Valorant 24−27 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2 no data
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 8−9 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Dota 2 7−8 no data
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 no data
Valorant 24−27 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 no data
Dota 2 7−8 no data
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 no data
Valorant 24−27 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 0−1 no data

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 no data
Valorant 1−2 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 0−1 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3 no data

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 October 2002 17 October 2023
Chip lithography 180 nm 7 nm

RX 6750 GRE has an age advantage of 21 year, and a 2471.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon IGP 340M and Radeon RX 6750 GRE. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon IGP 340M is a notebook card while Radeon RX 6750 GRE is a desktop 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.


ATI Radeon IGP 340M
Radeon IGP 340M
AMD Radeon RX 6750 GRE
Radeon RX 6750 GRE

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.


5 2 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 242 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6750 GRE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon IGP 340M or Radeon RX 6750 GRE, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.