GeForce RTX 2060 vs 320M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 320M with GeForce RTX 2060, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 320M
2010
23 Watt
0.54

RTX 2060 outperforms 320M by a whopping 6698% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1222131
Place by popularitynot in top-10016
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data40.41
Power efficiency1.6115.74
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameC89TU106
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 April 2010 (14 years ago)7 January 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$349

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 cores481920
Core clock speed450 MHz1365 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1680 MHz
Number of transistors486 million10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt160 Watt
Texture fill rate7.200201.6
Floating-point processing power0.0912 TFLOPS6.451 TFLOPS
ROPs848
TMUs16120
Tensor Coresno data240
Ray Tracing Coresno data30

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

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 SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared6 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared192 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data336.0 GB/s
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 outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA-7.5

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.

GeForce 320M 0.54
RTX 2060 36.71
+6698%

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 209
RTX 2060 14143
+6667%

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.

GeForce 320M 1852
RTX 2060 60454
+3164%

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 HD16
−644%
119
+644%
1440p1−2
−7600%
77
+7600%
4K0−147

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.93
1440pno data4.53
4Kno data7.43

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2000%
60−65
+2000%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−2200%
92
+2200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3433%
106
+3433%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2000%
60−65
+2000%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−12700%
128
+12700%
Hitman 3 5−6
−1860%
98
+1860%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−2380%
248
+2380%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−3083%
191
+3083%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−747%
254
+747%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−3175%
131
+3175%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3100%
96
+3100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2000%
60−65
+2000%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−9400%
95
+9400%
Hitman 3 5−6
−1820%
96
+1820%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−2370%
247
+2370%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−2100%
130−140
+2100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−660%
75−80
+660%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−713%
244
+713%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−1300%
56
+1300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−2267%
71
+2267%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−2000%
60−65
+2000%
Hitman 3 5−6
−1520%
81
+1520%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
−1100%
120
+1100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−2100%
130−140
+2100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−630%
73
+630%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−50%
45
+50%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−5500%
55−60
+5500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 35−40
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2700%
27−30
+2700%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−4100%
40−45
+4100%
Hitman 3 6−7
−800%
54
+800%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−2867%
89
+2867%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−23500%
236
+23500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−2367%
74
+2367%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−2700%
28
+2700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 24

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1800%
38
+1800%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 79
+0%
79
+0%
Battlefield 5 157
+0%
157
+0%
Far Cry 5 114
+0%
114
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 205
+0%
205
+0%
Metro Exodus 144
+0%
144
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 109
+0%
109
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 64
+0%
64
+0%
Battlefield 5 140
+0%
140
+0%
Far Cry 5 91
+0%
91
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 194
+0%
194
+0%
Metro Exodus 140
+0%
140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 103
+0%
103
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 55
+0%
55
+0%
Far Cry 5 70
+0%
70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 105
+0%
105
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 96
+0%
96
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 42
+0%
42
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 51
+0%
51
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Metro Exodus 76
+0%
76
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 40
+0%
40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 37
+0%
37
+0%
Hitman 3 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 104
+0%
104
+0%
Metro Exodus 52
+0%
52
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51
+0%
51
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 28
+0%
28
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 25
+0%
25
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 59
+0%
59
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 17
+0%
17
+0%

This is how GeForce 320M and RTX 2060 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 2060 is 644% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 2060 is 7600% faster in 1440p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 2060 is 23500% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 2060 is ahead in 35 tests (50%)
  • there's a draw in 35 tests (50%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.54 36.71
Recency 1 April 2010 7 January 2019
Chip lithography 40 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 160 Watt

GeForce 320M has 595.7% lower power consumption.

RTX 2060, on the other hand, has a 6698.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 2060 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 320M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 320M is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 2060 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.


NVIDIA GeForce 320M
GeForce 320M
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2060
GeForce RTX 2060

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.


3.5 52 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 10426 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2060 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.