ATI Radeon IGP 320M vs PRO W7500

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking118not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation100.00no data
Power efficiency37.17no data
ArchitectureRDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameNavi 33RS100
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date3 August 2023 (1 year ago)5 October 2002 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$429 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores17922
Core clock speed1500 MHz160 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHz160 MHz
Number of transistors13,300 million30 million
Manufacturing process technology6 nm180 nm
Power consumption (TDP)70 Wattno data
Texture fill rate190.40.16
Floating-point processing power12.19 TFLOPSno data
ROPs641
TMUs1121
Ray Tracing Cores28no data

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 4.0 x8AGP 4x
Length216 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR6System Shared
Maximum RAM amount8 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1344 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth172.0 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 Connectors4x DisplayPort 2.1No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)7.0
Shader Model6.7no data
OpenGL4.61.4
OpenCL2.2N/A
Vulkan1.3N/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.

PRO W7500 14497
+483133%
ATI IGP 320M 3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 August 2023 5 October 2002
Chip lithography 6 nm 180 nm

PRO W7500 has an age advantage of 20 years, and a 2900% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon PRO W7500 and Radeon IGP 320M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon PRO W7500 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon IGP 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.


AMD Radeon PRO W7500
Radeon PRO W7500
ATI Radeon IGP 320M
Radeon IGP 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.


4.1 17 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 17 votes

Rate Radeon IGP 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.