GeForce 320M vs Radeon RX Vega 10
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon RX Vega 10 and GeForce 320M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RX Vega 10 outperforms 320M by a whopping 683% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 742 | 1286 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 29.76 | 1.65 |
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | Raven | C89 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 8 January 2019 (6 years ago) | 1 April 2010 (15 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 cores | 640 | 48 |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1301 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 4,940 million | 486 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 23 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 52.04 | 7.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.665 TFLOPS | 0.0912 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 40 | 16 |
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 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no data |
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 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | System 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 11.1 (10_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 4.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
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.
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.
3DMark Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
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 | 17
−41.2%
| 24
+41.2%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40
+700%
|
5−6
−700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 12
+1100%
|
1−2
−1100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 14
+180%
|
5−6
−180%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 19
+850%
|
2−3
−850%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 33
+725%
|
4−5
−725%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 33
+725%
|
4−5
−725%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 17
+325%
|
4−5
−325%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 13
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 15
+87.5%
|
8−9
−87.5%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+100%
|
27−30
−100%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 16
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 42
+147%
|
16−18
−147%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Dota 2 | 32
+191%
|
10−12
−191%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 11 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 15
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14
+250%
|
4−5
−250%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 11
+1000%
|
1−2
−1000%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12
+50%
|
8−9
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 12
+140%
|
5−6
−140%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+100%
|
27−30
−100%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 17
+750%
|
2−3
−750%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+700%
|
1−2
−700%
|
| Dota 2 | 29
+164%
|
10−12
−164%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+375%
|
4−5
−375%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 9−10
+80%
|
5−6
−80%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+100%
|
8−9
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
+100%
|
27−30
−100%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 21−24
+1050%
|
2−3
−1050%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−33
+1400%
|
2−3
−1400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+520%
|
5−6
−520%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+720%
|
5−6
−720%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Valorant | 20−22
+567%
|
3−4
−567%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
This is how RX Vega 10 and GeForce 320M compete in popular games:
- GeForce 320M is 41% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RX Vega 10 is 1400% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, RX Vega 10 surpassed GeForce 320M in all 31 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.68 | 0.47 |
| Recency | 8 January 2019 | 1 April 2010 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 23 Watt |
RX Vega 10 has a 683% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 130% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX Vega 10 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 320M in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
