Radeon 610M vs ATI IGP 320M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon IGP 320M and Radeon 610M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI IGP 320M
2002
0.01

610M outperforms IGP 320M by a whopping 24800% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1579846
Place by popularitynot in top-10074
Power efficiencyno data13.37
ArchitectureRage 7 (2001−2006)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameRS100Dragon Range
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 October 2002 (22 years ago)3 January 2023 (2 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 cores2128
Core clock speed160 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed160 MHz2200 MHz
Number of transistors30 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology180 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rate0.1617.60
Floating-point processing powerno data0.5632 TFLOPS
ROPs14
TMUs18
Ray Tracing Coresno data2
L0 Cacheno data32 KB
L1 Cacheno data32 KB
L2 Cacheno data2 MB

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).

InterfaceAGP 4xPCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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

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 outputsPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX7.012 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGL1.44.6
OpenCLN/A2.1
VulkanN/A1.3

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.

ATI IGP 320M 0.01
Radeon 610M 2.49
+24800%

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.

ATI IGP 320M 3
Samples: 11
Radeon 610M 1101
+36600%
Samples: 365

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-0−113
1440p-0−125

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 6−7
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 6−7
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
Valorant 24−27
−83.3%
40−45
+83.3%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
−467%
50−55
+467%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 6−7
Dota 2 7−8
−286%
27−30
+286%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−225%
13
+225%
Valorant 24−27
−83.3%
40−45
+83.3%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 6−7
Dota 2 7−8
−286%
27−30
+286%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−60%
8−9
+60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−117%
12−14
+117%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−100%
8
+100%
Valorant 24−27
−83.3%
40−45
+83.3%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 0−1 24−27

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 4−5

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−6.7%
16−18
+6.7%
Valorant 0−1 12−14

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 52
+0%
52
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 38
+0%
38
+0%
Far Cry 5 14
+0%
14
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Far Cry 5 13
+0%
13
+0%
Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16
+0%
16
+0%
Metro Exodus 9
+0%
9
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
Valorant 61
+0%
61
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 610M is 600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Radeon 610M performs better in 23 tests (47%)
  • there's a draw in 26 tests (53%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.01 2.49
Recency 5 October 2002 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 180 nm 5 nm

Radeon 610M has a 24800% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 20 years, and a 3500% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon 610M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon IGP 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 Radeon IGP 320M
Radeon IGP 320M
AMD Radeon 610M
Radeon 610M

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.


3 17 votes

Rate Radeon IGP 320M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 1064 votes

Rate Radeon 610M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon IGP 320M or Radeon 610M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.