GeForce FX 5500 vs 320M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 320M with GeForce FX 5500, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 320M
2010
23 Watt
0.46
+2200%

320M outperforms FX 5500 by a whopping 2200% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13291574
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.55no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameC89NV34 B1
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 April 2010 (16 years ago)17 March 2004 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$36.99

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores48no data
Core clock speed450 MHz270 MHz
Number of transistors486 million45 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Wattno data
Texture fill rate7.2001.080
Floating-point processing power0.0912 TFLOPSno data
ROPs84
TMUs164

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 2.0 x16AGP 8x
Lengthno data152 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared64 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared166 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data5.312 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)9.0a
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.31.5 (2.1)
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

GeForce 320M 0.46
+2200%
FX 5500 0.02

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.

GeForce 320M 190
+2275%
Samples: 126
FX 5500 8
Samples: 178

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 HD24
+2300%
1−2
−2300%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data36.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Palworld 3−4 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Palworld 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1
Valorant 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 10−11 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Palworld 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7 0−1
Valorant 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 10−11 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7 0−1
Valorant 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%

Full HD
Epic

Palworld 3−4 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6 0−1

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Palworld 1−2 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 0−1
Valorant 5−6 0−1

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3 0−1

This is how GeForce 320M and FX 5500 compete in popular games:

  • GeForce 320M is 2300% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.46 0.02
Recency 1 April 2010 17 March 2004
Chip lithography 40 nm 150 nm

GeForce 320M has a 2200% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 275% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce 320M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5500 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 320M is a notebook graphics card while GeForce FX 5500 is a desktop one.

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 68 votes

Rate GeForce 320M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 177 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 320M or GeForce FX 5500, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.