ATI Radeon 8500 vs HD 6320
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Rage 7 (2001−2006) |
| GPU code name | Loveland | R200 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 15 August 2011 (13 years ago) | 14 August 2001 (23 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $554.99 | no data |
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 | 80 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 508 MHz | 275 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 600 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | 60 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 150 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 23 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 4.064 | 2.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.08128 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 4 |
| TMUs | 8 | 8 |
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).
| Interface | IGP | AGP 4x |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | System Shared | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 64 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 275 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 8.8 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | no data |
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 | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 8.1 |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 1.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. 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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 15 August 2011 | 14 August 2001 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 150 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 23 Watt |
HD 6320 has an age advantage of 10 years, a 275% more advanced lithography process, and 27.8% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 6320 and Radeon 8500. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6320 is a notebook card while Radeon 8500 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
