GeForce GT 325M vs GT 520MX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 520MX and GeForce GT 325M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 520MX
2011
1 GB DDR3, 20 Watt
0.73
+69.8%

GT 520MX outperforms GT 325M by an impressive 70% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11711256
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.561.31
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameGF119GT216
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date30 May 2011 (13 years ago)10 January 2010 (15 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 cores4848
Core clock speed900 MHz450 MHz
Number of transistors292 million486 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate7.2007.200
Floating-point processing power0.1728 TFLOPS0.09504 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data142
ROPs48
TMUs816

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).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
SLI options-+

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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHzUp to 1066 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s22.4 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 outputsDual Link DVIDisplayPortHDMIVGASingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Optimus+-
Power managementno data8.0

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 API11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.52.1
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA++

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.

GT 520MX 0.73
+69.8%
GT 325M 0.43

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.

GT 520MX 286
+69.2%
GT 325M 169

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.

GT 520MX 2620
+21.2%
GT 325M 2161

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

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
Valorant 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Valorant 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Dota 2 12−14
+18.2%
10−12
−18.2%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Valorant 27−30
+7.4%
27−30
−7.4%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 1−2 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

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

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the GT 520MX is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 520MX is ahead in 21 test (64%)
  • there's a draw in 12 tests (36%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.73 0.43
Recency 30 May 2011 10 January 2010
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 23 Watt

GT 520MX has a 69.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 15% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 520MX is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 325M in performance tests.

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 GT 520MX
GeForce GT 520MX
NVIDIA GeForce GT 325M
GeForce GT 325M

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.


3.3 230 votes

Rate GeForce GT 520MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 12 votes

Rate GeForce GT 325M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 520MX or GeForce GT 325M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.