GeForce GT 320M vs ATI Mobility Radeon

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Mobility Radeon and GeForce GT 320M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI Mobility
2001
16 MB DDR
1.18
+337%

Mobility outperforms 320M by a whopping 337% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10981404
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data1.49
ArchitectureRage 6 (2000−2007)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameM6G96C
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 December 2001 (23 years ago)15 June 2009 (16 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 coresno data32
Core clock speed144 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors30 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology180 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data14 Watt
Texture fill rate0.438.000
Floating-point processing powerno data0.08 TFLOPS
ROPs18
TMUs316
L2 Cacheno data32 KB

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
InterfaceAGP 4xMXM-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 typeDDRGDDR3
Maximum RAM amount16 MB512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed144 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth2.304 GB/s25.6 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX7.011.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGL1.33.3
OpenCLN/A1.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA-1.1

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 27 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.18 0.27
Recency 1 December 2001 15 June 2009
Maximum RAM amount 16 MB 512 MB
Chip lithography 180 nm 55 nm

ATI Mobility has a 337% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 320M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 227.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Mobility Radeon 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.


ATI Mobility Radeon
Mobility Radeon
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.


2.6 13 votes

Rate Mobility Radeon on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 136 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 Mobility Radeon or GeForce GT 320M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.