Radeon HD 6320 vs ATI Mobility HD 550v
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 550v and Radeon HD 6320, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Mobility HD 550v outperforms HD 6320 by a whopping 109% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1216 | 1337 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 5.60 | 1.49 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | M96 | Loveland |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 5 May 2010 (15 years ago) | 15 August 2011 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $554.99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 cores | 320 | 80 |
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | 508 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 600 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 514 million | 450 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 18 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 14.40 | 4.064 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.288 TFLOPS | 0.08128 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 4 |
| TMUs | 32 | 8 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | no data |
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 size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | IGP |
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 | 1 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 600 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 19.2 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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 | 20
+122%
| 9−10
−122%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 61.67 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+11.5%
|
24−27
−11.5%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
+50%
|
14−16
−50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+11.5%
|
24−27
−11.5%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+11.5%
|
24−27
−11.5%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Escape from Tarkov | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how ATI Mobility HD 550v and HD 6320 compete in popular games:
- ATI Mobility HD 550v is 122% 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 550v is 100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- ATI Mobility HD 550v performs better in 23 tests (85%)
- there's a draw in 4 tests (15%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.73 | 0.35 |
| Recency | 5 May 2010 | 15 August 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 18 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 550v has a 108.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 80% lower power consumption.
HD 6320, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.
The Mobility Radeon HD 550v is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6320 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
