GeForce 610M vs Radeon R5 M320

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 M320 and GeForce 610M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R5 M320
2015
4 GB DDR3
1.18
+57.3%

R5 M320 outperforms 610M by an impressive 57% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10681156
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data4.28
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code nameJetGF119
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date5 May 2015 (9 years ago)1 December 2011 (13 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 cores32048
Compute units5no data
Core clock speed780 MHz738 MHz
Boost clock speed855 MHz900 MHz
Number of transistors690 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown12 Watt
Texture fill rate17.105.904
Floating-point processing power0.5472 TFLOPS0.1417 TFLOPS
Video decodersno dataH.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p
ROPs84
TMUs208

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x16

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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64bit
Memory clock speed1000 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth16 GB/sUp to 14.4 GB/s
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 outputsNo outputs
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno dataUp to 2048x1536

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-
Optimus-+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 API
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.44.5
OpenCLNot Listed1.1
Vulkan+N/A
Mantle+-
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

R5 M320 1.18
+57.3%
GeForce 610M 0.75

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.

R5 M320 454
+56.6%
GeForce 610M 290

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

R5 M320 1652
+226%
GeForce 610M 508

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3.2%
30−35
−3.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3.2%
30−35
−3.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+16.7%
12−14
−16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+3.2%
30−35
−3.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

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

  • in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R5 M320 is 200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R5 M320 is ahead in 19 tests (54%)
  • there's a draw in 16 tests (46%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.18 0.75
Recency 5 May 2015 1 December 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm

R5 M320 has a 57.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R5 M320 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 610M in performance tests.


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 R5 M320
Radeon R5 M320
NVIDIA GeForce 610M
GeForce 610M

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 47 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 745 votes

Rate GeForce 610M 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.