Radeon RX 6800 XT vs GeForce 320M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 320M with Radeon RX 6800 XT, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 320M
2010
23 Watt
0.45

6800 XT outperforms 320M by a whopping 13196% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking131743
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data42.46
Power efficiency1.5115.36
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameC89Navi 21
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 April 2010 (15 years ago)28 October 2020 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores484608
Core clock speed450 MHz1825 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2250 MHz
Number of transistors486 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Watt300 Watt
Texture fill rate7.200648.0
Floating-point processing power0.0912 TFLOPS20.74 TFLOPS
ROPs8128
TMUs16288
Ray Tracing Coresno data72
L0 Cacheno data1.1 MB
L1 Cacheno data1 MB
L2 Cacheno data4 MB
L3 Cacheno data128 MB

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 data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 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 Shared16 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data512.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-
Resizable BAR-+

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 HDMI, 2x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.5
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A2.1
VulkanN/A1.2

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 0.45
RX 6800 XT 59.83
+13196%

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
Samples: 126
RX 6800 XT 25025
+13071%
Samples: 7203

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
RX 6800 XT 96516
+5111%

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
−713%
195
+713%
1440p1−2
−13700%
138
+13700%
4K0−192

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.33
1440pno data4.70
4Kno data7.05

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−14900%
150−160
+14900%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−14900%
150−160
+14900%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−5800%
230−240
+5800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2386%
170−180
+2386%
Valorant 27−30
−1141%
300−350
+1141%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
−1644%
270−280
+1644%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−14900%
150−160
+14900%
Dota 2 10−11
−1560%
166
+1560%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−5800%
230−240
+5800%
Metro Exodus 0−1 152
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2386%
170−180
+2386%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−5780%
294
+5780%
Valorant 27−30
−1141%
300−350
+1141%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−14900%
150−160
+14900%
Dota 2 10−11
−1350%
145
+1350%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−5800%
230−240
+5800%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−2386%
170−180
+2386%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−3100%
160
+3100%
Valorant 27−30
−1219%
356
+1219%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−5900%
180−190
+5900%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
−22900%
450−500
+22900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
−3400%
170−180
+3400%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−19800%
190−200
+19800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−13900%
140−150
+13900%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 150−160

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−857%
134
+857%
Valorant 2−3
−16100%
300−350
+16100%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−4700%
95−100
+4700%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−3850%
75−80
+3850%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 191
+0%
191
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Far Cry 5 143
+0%
143
+0%
Fortnite 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 183
+0%
183
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 290−300
+0%
290−300
+0%
Far Cry 5 139
+0%
139
+0%
Fortnite 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 150
+0%
150
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 175
+0%
175
+0%
Far Cry 5 130
+0%
130
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 280−290
+0%
280−290
+0%

1440p
High

Grand Theft Auto V 120
+0%
120
+0%
Metro Exodus 95
+0%
95
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 154
+0%
154
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 131
+0%
131
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Metro Exodus 56
+0%
56
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 110
+0%
110
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 103
+0%
103
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Dota 2 122
+0%
122
+0%
Far Cry 5 95
+0%
95
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

This is how GeForce 320M and RX 6800 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6800 XT is 713% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6800 XT is 13700% faster in 1440p

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

  • in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX 6800 XT is 22900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6800 XT performs better in 27 tests (47%)
  • there's a draw in 31 tests (53%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.45 59.83
Recency 1 April 2010 28 October 2020
Chip lithography 40 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 23 Watt 300 Watt

GeForce 320M has 1204.3% lower power consumption.

RX 6800 XT, on the other hand, has a 13195.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 320M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 320M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 6800 XT 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
AMD Radeon RX 6800 XT
Radeon RX 6800 XT

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
4.3 4469 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6800 XT 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 RX 6800 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.