UHD Graphics 32EU vs Radeon Graphics 384SP

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 5.1 (2018−2022)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameCezanneTiger Lake GT1
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date13 April 2021 (3 years ago)2021 (3 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 cores384256
Core clock speed300 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHz1350 MHz
Number of transistors9,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology7 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate40.8021.60
Floating-point processing power1.306 TFLOPS0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs2416

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).

InterfaceIGPRing Bus
WidthIGPno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)6.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.31.3

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 7 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 15 Watt

Graphics 384SP has a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

UHD Graphics 32EU, on the other hand, has 200% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Graphics 384SP and UHD Graphics 32EU. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Graphics 384SP is a desktop card while UHD Graphics 32EU is a notebook one.


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

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.


AMD Radeon Graphics 384SP
Radeon Graphics 384SP
Intel UHD Graphics 32EU
UHD Graphics 32EU

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.4 20 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics 384SP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 4 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 32EU on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

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