Radeon Pro V320 vs R2 Graphics

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 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameBeemaVega 10
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date27 February 2015 (9 years ago)29 June 2017 (7 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 cores1283584
Core clock speed351 MHz852 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1500 MHz
Number of transistors930 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt230 Watt
Texture fill rate2.808336.0
Floating-point processing power0.08986 TFLOPS10.75 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs8224

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 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 SharedHBM2
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared2048 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared945 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data483.8 GB/s

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 outputs4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 February 2015 29 June 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 230 Watt

R2 Graphics has 1433.3% lower power consumption.

Pro V320, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R2 Graphics and Radeon Pro V320. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R2 Graphics is a desktop card while Radeon Pro V320 is a workstation 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 R2 Graphics
Radeon R2 Graphics
AMD Radeon Pro V320
Radeon Pro V320

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.


2.4 452 votes

Rate Radeon R2 Graphics on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 6 votes

Rate Radeon Pro V320 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.