Quadro4 380 XGL vs GeForce 320M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 320M with Quadro4 380 XGL, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 320M
2010
23 Watt
0.50
+4900%

320M outperforms Quadro4 380 XGL by a whopping 4900% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking12921562
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.67no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code nameC89NV18 A4
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 April 2010 (15 years ago)12 November 2002 (23 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 cores48no data
Core clock speed450 MHz275 MHz
Number of transistors486 million29 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Wattno data
Texture fill rate7.2001.100
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
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 Shared128 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared256 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data8.192 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)8.0
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.31.3
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 0.50
+4900%
Quadro4 380 XGL 0.01

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
+3383%
Samples: 124
Quadro4 380 XGL 6
Samples: 6

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 HD24-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1
Valorant 27−30 0−1

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 10−12 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6 0−1
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1
Valorant 27−30 0−1

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 10−12 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1
Valorant 27−30 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6 0−1

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 0−1
Valorant 3−4 0−1

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.50 0.01
Recency 1 April 2010 12 November 2002
Chip lithography 40 nm 150 nm

GeForce 320M has a 4900% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 275% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce 320M is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro4 380 XGL in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 320M is a notebook graphics card while Quadro4 380 XGL is a workstation 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 Quadro4 380 XGL
Quadro4 380 XGL

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 67 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 290 votes

Rate Quadro4 380 XGL on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 320M or Quadro4 380 XGL, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.