GeForce 320M vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and GeForce 320M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
2017
15 Watt
4.52
+737%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms 320M by a whopping 737% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6611224
Place by popularity36not in top-100
Power efficiency20.741.62
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeC89
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date26 October 2017 (7 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 cores51248
Core clock speed300 MHz450 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistors9,800 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate57.607.200
Floating-point processing power1.843 TFLOPS0.0912 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs3216

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 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.44.1
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.1N/A
Vulkan1.2N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 4.52
+737%
GeForce 320M 0.54

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.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 1737
+731%
GeForce 320M 209

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 10294
+456%
GeForce 320M 1852

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 HD17
−17.6%
20
+17.6%
4K11
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+350%
2−3
−350%
Elden Ring 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 10
+900%
1−2
−900%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 4
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 22
+267%
6−7
−267%
Metro Exodus 13
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16
+220%
5−6
−220%
Valorant 22
+1000%
2−3
−1000%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
+50%
2−3
−50%
Dota 2 22
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Elden Ring 5 0−1
Far Cry 5 17
+143%
7−8
−143%
Fortnite 18 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
Grand Theft Auto V 13
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Metro Exodus 8 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 37
+363%
8−9
−363%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
+20%
5−6
−20%
Valorant 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
World of Tanks 42
+163%
16−18
−163%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Cyberpunk 2077 3
+50%
2−3
−50%
Dota 2 35
+775%
4−5
−775%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+229%
7−8
−229%
Forza Horizon 4 14
+133%
6−7
−133%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10
+25%
8−9
−25%
Valorant 15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 3−4 0−1
Elden Ring 5−6 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+933%
3−4
−933%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1
World of Tanks 30−35
+3100%
1−2
−3100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Valorant 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+13.3%
14−16
−13.3%
Elden Ring 2−3 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 15
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Fortnite 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4 0−1
Valorant 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and GeForce 320M compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 320M is 18% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 1000% faster in 4K

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

  • in World of Tanks, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 3100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is ahead in 30 tests (91%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (9%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.52 0.54
Recency 26 October 2017 1 April 2010
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 23 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has a 737% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 53.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 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.

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 RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
NVIDIA GeForce 320M
GeForce 320M

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.


3.5 1484 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 53 votes

Rate GeForce 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.