GeForce 320M vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 and GeForce 320M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
2020
8.76
+1764%

Tiger Lake-U Graphics G7 outperforms 320M by a whopping 1764% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4981282
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data1.65
ArchitectureGen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameTiger Lake XeC89
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 August 2020 (5 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 cores9648
Core clock speedno data450 MHz
Number of transistorsno data486 million
Manufacturing process technology10 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data23 Watt
Texture fill rateno data7.200
Floating-point processing powerno data0.0912 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data16

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 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 typeDDR4System Shared
Maximum RAM amountno dataSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem 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 dataNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectXDirectX 12_111.1 (10_1)
Shader Modelno data4.1
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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 HD400−450
+1567%
24
−1567%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Fortnite 55−60
+1767%
3−4
−1767%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+925%
4−5
−925%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
Valorant 90−95
+237%
27−30
−237%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+741%
16−18
−741%
Dota 2 65−70
+518%
10−12
−518%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Fortnite 55−60
+1767%
3−4
−1767%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+925%
4−5
−925%
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40
+3400%
1−2
−3400%
Metro Exodus 18−20 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%
Valorant 90−95
+237%
27−30
−237%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%
Dota 2 65−70
+518%
10−12
−518%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+925%
4−5
−925%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+325%
8−9
−325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 55−60
+1767%
3−4
−1767%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 70−75
+7100%
1−2
−7100%
Grand Theft Auto V 12−14 0−1
Metro Exodus 10−11 0−1
Valorant 100−110
+1980%
5−6
−1980%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+1000%
2−3
−1000%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 20−22 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 20−22
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11 0−1
Valorant 45−50
+1533%
3−4
−1533%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 10−12 0−1
Dota 2 30−35
+3300%
1−2
−3300%
Far Cry 5 9−10 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 16−18 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
High

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 and GeForce 320M compete in popular games:

  • Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is 1567% 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 Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is 7100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 performs better in 19 tests (61%)
  • there's a draw in 12 tests (39%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.76 0.47
Recency 15 August 2020 1 April 2010
Chip lithography 10 nm 40 nm

Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 has a 1763.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 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.


Intel Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
NVIDIA GeForce 320M
GeForce 320M

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.


3.9 16 votes

Rate Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 64 votes

Rate GeForce 320M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 or GeForce 320M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.