GeForce GT 320M vs Iris Plus Graphics 640

#ad 
Buy
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Plus Graphics 640 and GeForce GT 320M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Iris Plus Graphics 640
2017
32 GB DDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4, 15 Watt
3.33
+1348%

Iris Plus Graphics 640 outperforms GT 320M by a whopping 1348% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7211368
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency17.621.30
ArchitectureGeneration 9.5 (2016−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT3eG96C
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 January 2017 (8 years ago)15 June 2009 (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 cores38432
Core clock speed300 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm++55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rate52.808.000
Floating-point processing power0.8448 TFLOPS0.08 TFLOPS
ROPs68
TMUs4816

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
InterfaceRing BusMXM-II
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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/DDR4GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount32 GB512 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 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 ConnectorsPortable Device DependentNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL3.01.1
Vulkan1.3N/A
CUDA-1.1

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.

Iris Plus Graphics 640 3.33
+1348%
GT 320M 0.23

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.

Iris Plus Graphics 640 1489
+1318%
GT 320M 105

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 HD21
+2000%
1−2
−2000%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 12−14 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Far Cry 5 9−10 0−1
Fortnite 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
Valorant 50−55
+96.2%
24−27
−96.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 12−14 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 65−70
+442%
12−14
−442%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Dota 2 29
+222%
9−10
−222%
Far Cry 5 9−10 0−1
Fortnite 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Forza Horizon 5 8−9 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 6 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7 0−1
Metro Exodus 7−8 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+267%
3−4
−267%
Valorant 50−55
+96.2%
24−27
−96.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Dota 2 21
+133%
9−10
−133%
Far Cry 5 9−10 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+467%
3−4
−467%
Hogwarts Legacy 6−7 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+114%
7−8
−114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Valorant 50−55
+96.2%
24−27
−96.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 5−6 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
+2600%
1−2
−2600%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4 0−1
Metro Exodus 2−3 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+1350%
2−3
−1350%
Valorant 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+800%
1−2
−800%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 7−8 0−1

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Valorant 18−20
+800%
2−3
−800%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 10−12 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%

This is how Iris Plus Graphics 640 and GT 320M compete in popular games:

  • Iris Plus Graphics 640 is 2000% faster in 1080p

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Iris Plus Graphics 640 is 1350% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, Iris Plus Graphics 640 surpassed GT 320M in all 25 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.33 0.23
Recency 3 January 2017 15 June 2009
Maximum RAM amount 32 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 14 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 640 has a 1347.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 292.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 320M, on the other hand, has 7.1% lower power consumption.

The Iris Plus Graphics 640 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 320M 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.


Intel Iris Plus Graphics 640
Iris Plus Graphics 640
NVIDIA GeForce GT 320M
GeForce GT 320M

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.


3.3 313 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 640 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 132 votes

Rate GeForce GT 320M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Iris Plus Graphics 640 or GeForce GT 320M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.