GeForce 320M vs Mobility Radeon HD 3850

Place in performance ranking	1139	1182
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Architecture	RV6xx (2007−2010)	GT2xx (2009−2012)
GPU code name	M88	MCP89
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 December 2007 (16 years ago)	1 April 2010 (14 years ago)
Current price	no data	$408

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

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 cores	320	32
Core clock speed	580 MHz	450 MHz
Number of transistors	666 million	486 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	9.280	7.200
Floating-point performance	371.2 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Mobility Radeon HD 3850 and GeForce 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.

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16

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 type	GDDR3	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	System Shared
Memory bus width	256 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	750 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	48 GB/s	no data
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 Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	10.1 (10_1)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	4.1	4.1
OpenGL	3.3	3.3
OpenCL	N/A	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

ATI Mobility HD 3850 0.67
+24.1%

GeForce 320M 0.54

Mobility Radeon HD 3850 outperforms GeForce 320M by 24% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

ATI Mobility HD 3850 1880
+1.5%

GeForce 320M 1852

Mobility Radeon HD 3850 outperforms GeForce 320M by 1% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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 HD

16−18
+23.1%

−23.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4
+50%

2−3

−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Hitman 3	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry 5	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

This is how ATI Mobility HD 3850 and GeForce 320M compete in popular games:

ATI Mobility HD 3850 is 23% faster in 1080p

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

in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the ATI Mobility HD 3850 is 50% faster than the GeForce 320M.

All in all, in popular games:

ATI Mobility HD 3850 is ahead in 8 tests (25%)
there's a draw in 24 tests (75%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.67	0.54
Recency	1 December 2007	1 April 2010
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	System Shared
Chip lithography	55 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	55 Watt	23 Watt