GeForce 6800 vs GeForce GT 320M

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 6800 is positioned at rank 726 and the GeForce GT 320M is on rank 163, so the GeForce GT 320M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 6800

#716

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

28571%

#718

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

25900%

#719

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

25832%

#723

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

23489%

#724

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

23329%

#726

GeForce 6800

MSRP: $299|Avg: $50

100%

#727

Radeon 3100

MSRP: $199|Avg: $30

97%

#728

GeForce 6800 GT

MSRP: $399|Avg: $40

95%

#729

GeForce 7950 GX2

MSRP: $599|Avg: $80

89%

#730

Mobility Radeon X1450

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

87%

#731

MOBILITY RADEON X1800

MSRP: $399|Avg: $50

87%

#732

MOBILITY RADEON 9550

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

79%

#733

MOBILITY RADEON 7000 IGP

MSRP: $20|Avg: $5

79%

#734

GeForce 6200

MSRP: $129|Avg: $10

76%

#736

GeForce FX 5500

MSRP: $37|Avg: $30

58%

#737

MOBILITY RADEON 9800

MSRP: $229|Avg: $25

53%

#738

RADEON 9500

MSRP: $179|Avg: $30

53%

#739

RADEON X850 XT

MSRP: $499|Avg: $50

42%

#740

RADEON 9800

MSRP: $399|Avg: $399

39%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 320M

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

954%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

917%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

906%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

905%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

903%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

898%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

886%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

883%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

875%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

873%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

862%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

860%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

845%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

844%

#90

GeForce RTX 5090 D v2

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $4086.44

98%

#91

Radeon Ryzen 5 150

MSRP: $350|Avg: $350

98%

#92

Radeon Ryzen 7 4800H

MSRP: $450|Avg: $450

95%

#148

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

1053%

#163

GeForce GT 320M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#164

Radeon R7 512 Cores (Kaveri Desktop)

MSRP: $173|Avg: $35

99%

#165

Radeon HD 6520G

MSRP: $40|Avg: $5

99%

#166

Radeon HD 8470D

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

98%

#167

GeForce GT 545

MSRP: $149|Avg: $20

98%

#170

GeForce GT 340

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

97%

#171

GeForce GT 230

MSRP: $44|Avg: $44

97%

#172

Radeon HD 6670

MSRP: $99|Avg: $99

96%

#175

Radeon R5 420

MSRP: $80|Avg: $20

95%

#176

Radeon R7 A8-7670K

MSRP: $118|Avg: $50

94%

#177

Radeon HD 6570

MSRP: $79|Avg: $79

93%

#178

Radeon HD 8370D

MSRP: $45|Avg: $10

92%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GT 320M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.9% higher G3D Mark score and 300% more VRAM (1 GB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 6800.

Insight	GeForce 6800	GeForce GT 320M
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.9%)	✅Leading raw performance (+0.9%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+300%)
Efficiency	Normal Efficiency	Normal Efficiency
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GT 320M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

Performance Check

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

GeForce 6800 Benchmark Check

GeForce GT 320M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 6800 and GeForce GT 320M

GeForce 6800

The GeForce 6800 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 22 2014. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1082 MHz to 1150 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 113 points.

GeForce GT 320M

The GeForce GT 320M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1228 MHz to 1468 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 114 points. Launch price was $79.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce 6800 scores 113 and the GeForce GT 320M reaches 114 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 6800 is built on Maxwell while the GeForce GT 320M uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 256 (GeForce 6800) vs 384 (GeForce GT 320M). Raw compute: 0.5888 TFLOPS (GeForce 6800) vs 1.127 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 320M). Boost clocks: 1150 MHz vs 1468 MHz.

Feature	GeForce 6800	GeForce GT 320M
G3D Mark Score	113	114
Architecture	Maxwell	Pascal
Process Node	28 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	256	384+50%
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.5888 TFLOPS	1.127 TFLOPS+91%
Boost Clock	1150 MHz	1468 MHz+28%
ROPs	8	16+100%
TMUs	16	24+50%
L1 Cache	128 KB	144 KB+13%
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce 6800	GeForce GT 320M
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce 6800 comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GT 320M has 1 GB. The GeForce GT 320M offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 6800) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce GT 320M) — the GeForce 6800 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce 6800	GeForce GT 320M
VRAM Capacity	0.25 GB	1 GB+300%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit+100%	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 9.0c (GeForce 6800) vs 11.1 (FL10_1) (GeForce GT 320M). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 2.1 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce 6800	GeForce GT 320M
DirectX	9.0c	11.1 (FL10_1)+23%
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
OpenGL	2.1	3.3+57%
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (GeForce 6800) vs VP4 (GeForce GT 320M). Decoder: PureVideo (VP1) vs VP4. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,WMV (GeForce 6800) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (GeForce GT 320M).

Feature	GeForce 6800	GeForce GT 320M
Encoder	None	VP4
Decoder	PureVideo (VP1)	VP4
Codecs	MPEG-2,WMV	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce 6800 draws 33W versus the GeForce GT 320M's 30W — a 9.5% difference. The GeForce GT 320M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 6800) vs 350W (GeForce GT 320M). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 198mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80 vs 80°C.