Radeon Graphics 320SP vs GeForce MX150

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking586not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code nameN17S-G1Renoir
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date16 May 2017 (7 years ago)6 January 2020 (4 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 cores384320
Core clock speed1468 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1532 MHz1400 MHz
Number of transistors1,800 million9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt (10 - 25 Watt TGP)15 Watt
Texture fill rate24.9128.00
Floating-point processing power0.7972 gflops0.896 gflops
ROPs168
TMUs2420

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 sizelargeno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16IGP
Widthno dataIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed6008 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth40.1 GB/sno data
Shared memory-no data

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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.46.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA6.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 16 May 2017 6 January 2020
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 15 Watt

Graphics 320SP has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce MX150 and Radeon Graphics 320SP. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce MX150 is a notebook card while Radeon Graphics 320SP is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 MX150
GeForce MX150
AMD Radeon Graphics 320SP
Radeon Graphics 320SP

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.6 1587 votes

Rate GeForce MX150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 3 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics 320SP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.