Radeon RX 6950 XT vs ATI IGP 340M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking160525
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data33.77
Power efficiencyno data15.44
ArchitectureRage 6 (2000−2007)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameRS200Navi 21
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date5 October 2002 (23 years ago)10 May 2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,099

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores25120
Core clock speed183 MHz1925 MHz
Boost clock speed180 MHz2324 MHz
Number of transistors30 million26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology180 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data335 Watt
Texture fill rate0.37743.7
Floating-point processing powerno data23.8 TFLOPS
ROPs2128
TMUs2320
Ray Tracing Coresno data80
L0 Cacheno data1.3 MB
L1 Cacheno data1 MB
L2 Cacheno data4 MB
L3 Cacheno data128 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 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data3-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 8-pin

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 SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared16 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data576.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-
Resizable BAR-+

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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX7.012 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.5
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.



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 340M 2
Samples: 4
RX 6950 XT 28083
+1404050%
Samples: 3620

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 HDno data218
1440pno data133
4Kno data84

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data5.04
1440pno data8.26
4Kno data13.08

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 161

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 143
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−13400%
270−280
+13400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2800%
170−180
+2800%
Valorant 21−24
−1596%
350−400
+1596%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 9−10
−3000%
270−280
+3000%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 128
Dota 2 7−8
−2743%
199
+2743%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−13400%
270−280
+13400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2800%
170−180
+2800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−9300%
376
+9300%
Valorant 21−24
−1596%
350−400
+1596%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 122
Dota 2 7−8
−2286%
167
+2286%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
−13400%
270−280
+13400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2800%
170−180
+2800%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−5300%
216
+5300%
Valorant 21−24
−1596%
350−400
+1596%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−11700%
236
+11700%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 0−1 230−240
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−16600%
160−170
+16600%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−1143%
174
+1143%
Valorant 0−1 300−350

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−9500%
95−100
+9500%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 1−2
−7800%
75−80
+7800%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 351
+0%
351
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 349
+0%
349
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 339
+0%
339
+0%
Far Cry 5 181
+0%
181
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 237
+0%
237
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 318
+0%
318
+0%
Far Cry 5 173
+0%
173
+0%
Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 229
+0%
229
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 172
+0%
172
+0%
Metro Exodus 189
+0%
189
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Far Cry 5 164
+0%
164
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 500−550
+0%
500−550
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 153
+0%
153
+0%
Metro Exodus 120
+0%
120
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 450−500
+0%
450−500
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 93
+0%
93
+0%
Far Cry 5 163
+0%
163
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 58
+0%
58
+0%
Metro Exodus 77
+0%
77
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 144
+0%
144
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 46
+0%
46
+0%
Dota 2 141
+0%
141
+0%
Far Cry 5 124
+0%
124
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX 6950 XT is 16600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6950 XT performs better in 19 tests (35%)
  • there's a draw in 35 tests (65%)

Pros & cons summary


Recency 5 October 2002 10 May 2022
Chip lithography 180 nm 7 nm

RX 6950 XT has an age advantage of 19 years, and a 2471% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon IGP 340M and Radeon RX 6950 XT. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon IGP 340M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX 6950 XT is a desktop one.

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.


5 2 votes

Rate Radeon IGP 340M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 2987 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6950 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon IGP 340M or Radeon RX 6950 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.