GeForce 320M vs Radeon R5 (Carrizo)

Place in the ranking	919	1222
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.62	1.61
Architecture	GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	Carrizo	C89
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	4 June 2015 (9 years ago)	1 April 2010 (14 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 cores	256	48
Core clock speed	no data	450 MHz
Boost clock speed	800 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2410 Million	486 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12-35 Watt	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	7.200
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.0912 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	8
TMUs	no data	16

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 size	medium sized	no data
Interface	no data	PCIe 2.0 x16

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 type	no data	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	no data	System Shared
Memory bus width	64/128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	no data	System 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 Connectors

no data

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (FL 12_0)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	no data	4.1
OpenGL	no data	3.3
OpenCL	no data	N/A
Vulkan	-	N/A

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD

50−55
+213%

−213%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5
+33.3%

3−4

−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +70%	10−11 −70%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +16.7%	30−33 −16.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +70%	10−11 −70%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +16.7%	30−33 −16.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +75%	4−5 −75%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +70%	10−11 −70%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +20%	10−11 −20%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +16.7%	30−33 −16.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+300%

1−2

−300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+66.7%

3−4

−66.7%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4
+50%

2−3

−50%

This is how R5 (Carrizo) and GeForce 320M compete in popular games:

R5 (Carrizo) is 213% faster in 1080p

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

in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R5 (Carrizo) is 900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

R5 (Carrizo) is ahead in 34 tests (97%)
there's a draw in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.84	0.54
Recency	4 June 2015	1 April 2010
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	23 Watt

R5 (Carrizo) has a 240.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 91.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R5 (Carrizo) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 320M in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.