ATI Radeon IGP 340M vs GeForce 820A

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10431577
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency6.76no data
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Rage 6 (2000−2007)
GPU code nameGF117RS200
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date17 March 2014 (11 years ago)5 October 2002 (22 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 cores962
Core clock speed775 MHz183 MHz
Boost clock speedno data180 MHz
Number of transistors585 million30 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm180 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate12.400.37
Floating-point processing power0.2976 TFLOPSno data
ROPs82
TMUs162

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
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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno 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 outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)7.0
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.61.4
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.1-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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 820A 556
+27700%
ATI IGP 340M 2

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
God of War 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
God of War 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
God of War 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
God of War 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 23 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 March 2014 5 October 2002
Chip lithography 28 nm 180 nm

GeForce 820A has an age advantage of 11 years, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 820A and Radeon IGP 340M. We've got no test results to judge.

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 820A
GeForce 820A
ATI Radeon IGP 340M
Radeon IGP 340M

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.


2.8 42 votes

Rate GeForce 820A on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Radeon IGP 340M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 820A or Radeon IGP 340M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.