ATI Radeon IGP 320M vs Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655

#ad
Buy
VS
#ad
Buy

General info

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

Place in performance ranking641not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.98no data
ArchitectureGen. 9.5 Kaby Lake (2015−2017)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameKaby Lake GT3eRS100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 September 2017 (6 years old)5 October 2002 (21 year old)
Current price$999 $184
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Technical specs

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores48no data
Core clock speed300 MHz2 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHz160 MHz
Number of transistors189 million30 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm180 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate50.400.16

Size and compatibility

Information on Iris Plus Graphics 655 and Radeon IGP 320M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x1AGP 4x
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

Memory

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 typeDDR3/DDR4System Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
Shared memory++

Video outputs and ports

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

Technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)7.0
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.61.4
OpenCL2.1N/A
Vulkan1.1.103N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

Iris Plus Graphics 655 1742
+57967%
ATI IGP 320M 3

Iris Plus Graphics 655 outperforms Radeon IGP 320M by 57967% in Passmark.

Advantages and disadvantages


Recency 1 September 2017 5 October 2002
Chip lithography 14 nm 180 nm

We couldn't decide between Iris Plus Graphics 655 and Radeon IGP 320M. We've got no test results to judge.


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

User ratings

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 655
Iris Plus Graphics 655
ATI Radeon IGP 320M
Radeon IGP 320M

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 294 votes

Rate Intel Iris Plus Graphics 655 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 17 votes

Rate ATI Radeon IGP 320M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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