GeForce GT 320M vs Radeon R5 Graphics
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | Spectre SL | G96C |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 17 September 2014 (10 years ago) | 15 June 2009 (15 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 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | 497 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 720 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,410 million | 314 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 14 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 7.952 | 8.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.2545 TFLOPS | 0.08 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 8 |
| TMUs | 16 | 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 | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | IGP | MXM-II |
| Width | IGP | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | System Shared | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.0 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 1.1 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 17 September 2014 | 15 June 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 14 Watt |
R5 Graphics has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.
GT 320M, on the other hand, has 7.1% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Radeon R5 Graphics and GeForce GT 320M. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon R5 Graphics is a desktop card while GeForce GT 320M is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
