ATI Radeon 7200 vs GeForce 320M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13171611
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.51no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Rage 6 (2000−2007)
GPU code nameC89R100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 April 2010 (16 years ago)1 April 2000 (26 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 MHz166 MHz
Number of transistors486 million30 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm180 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate7.2001
Floating-point processing power0.0912 TFLOPSno data
ROPs82
TMUs166

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 4x
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 Shared32 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 VGA

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)7.0
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.



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
+9400%
Samples: 126
ATI 7200 2
Samples: 1

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 HD24no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 no data

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 no data
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8 no data
Valorant 27−30 no data

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 no data
Dota 2 10−11 no data
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 no data
Metro Exodus 0−1 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 no data
Valorant 27−30 no data

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 no data
Dota 2 10−11 no data
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 no data
Valorant 27−30 no data

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4 no data
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3 no data
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6 no data

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 no data

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 no data

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 no data
Valorant 2−3 no data

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3 no data

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3 no data

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 April 2010 1 April 2000
Chip lithography 40 nm 180 nm

GeForce 320M has an age advantage of 10 years, and a 350% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 320M and Radeon 7200. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 320M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon 7200 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
4.1 24 votes

Rate Radeon 7200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 320M or Radeon 7200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.