GeForce RTX 3060 vs 320M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 320M with GeForce RTX 3060, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 320M
2010
23 Watt
0.54

RTX 3060 outperforms 320M by a whopping 8111% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking123384
Place by popularitynot in top-1005
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data69.91
Power efficiency1.6217.95
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameC89GA106
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 April 2010 (14 years ago)12 January 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$329

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores483584
Core clock speed450 MHz1320 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1777 MHz
Number of transistors486 million12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt170 Watt
Texture fill rate7.200199.0
Floating-point processing power0.0912 TFLOPS12.74 TFLOPS
ROPs848
TMUs16112
Tensor Coresno data112
Ray Tracing Coresno data28

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 4.0 x16
Lengthno data242 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 12-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 Shared12 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared192 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1875 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data360.0 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 HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.7
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.6
DLSS-+

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.

GeForce 320M 0.54
RTX 3060 44.34
+8111%

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark Vantage Performance

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 3060 17085
+8075%

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 3060 79706
+4204%

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
−392%
118
+392%
1440p0−168
4K0−147

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.79
1440pno data4.84
4Kno data7.00

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
Atomic Heart 2−3
−6150%
120−130
+6150%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−1271%
95−100
+1271%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3850%
79
+3850%
Atomic Heart 2−3
−6150%
120−130
+6150%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−1286%
97
+1286%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3800%
78
+3800%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−3850%
150−160
+3850%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2171%
150−160
+2171%
Valorant 27−30
−739%
230−240
+739%
Atomic Heart 2−3
−6150%
120−130
+6150%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−1086%
83
+1086%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−1535%
270−280
+1535%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3650%
75
+3650%
Dota 2 10−12
−1318%
156
+1318%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−3850%
150−160
+3850%
Metro Exodus 0−1 81
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2171%
150−160
+2171%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−4350%
178
+4350%
Valorant 27−30
−739%
230−240
+739%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
−929%
72
+929%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−3100%
64
+3100%
Dota 2 10−12
−1236%
147
+1236%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−3850%
150−160
+3850%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2171%
150−160
+2171%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1950%
82
+1950%
Valorant 27−30
−739%
230−240
+739%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 1−2
−28100%
280−290
+28100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−5733%
170−180
+5733%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 39
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−11800%
110−120
+11800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−7100%
72
+7100%
Fortnite 1−2
−10900%
110−120
+10900%
Atomic Heart 0−1 30−35
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−447%
82
+447%
Valorant 3−4
−8200%
240−250
+8200%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−4700%
48
+4700%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−2800%
55−60
+2800%
Fortnite 2−3
−2650%
55−60
+2650%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 146
+0%
146
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 124
+0%
124
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 135
+0%
135
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 96
+0%
96
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 141
+0%
141
+0%
Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Far Cry 5 127
+0%
127
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 81
+0%
81
+0%
Metro Exodus 50
+0%
50
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Far Cry 5 94
+0%
94
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 62
+0%
62
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 32
+0%
32
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 64
+0%
64
+0%
Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9
+0%
9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Dota 2 115
+0%
115
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 36
+0%
36
+0%

This is how GeForce 320M and RTX 3060 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3060 is 392% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 3060 is 28100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 3060 is ahead in 35 tests (55%)
  • there's a draw in 29 tests (45%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.54 44.34
Recency 1 April 2010 12 January 2021
Chip lithography 40 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 170 Watt

GeForce 320M has 639.1% lower power consumption.

RTX 3060, on the other hand, has a 8111.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 400% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 3060 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 3060 is a desktop one.

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 3060
GeForce RTX 3060

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.


3.4
62 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1
30288 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 3060 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 320M or GeForce RTX 3060, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.