GeForce GT 320 vs GeForce 9800M GTX
GeForce GT 320
Popular choices:
GeForce 9800M GTX
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
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 GT 320 is positioned at rank 201 and the GeForce 9800M GTX is on rank 671, so the GeForce GT 320 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 320
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9800M GTX
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GT 320 is significantly newer (2017 vs 2008). The GeForce GT 320 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 9800M GTX lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GT 320 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 9800M GTX.
| Insight | GeForce GT 320 | GeForce 9800M GTX |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / G9x (2007−2010)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GT 320 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GT 320 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $30), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 3.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GT 320 | GeForce 9800M GTX |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+3.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GT 320 and GeForce 9800M GTX
GeForce GT 320
The GeForce GT 320 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: 470 points. Launch price was $79.
GeForce 9800M GTX
The GeForce 9800M GTX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in July 15 2008. It features the G9x architecture. The core clock speed is 500 MHz. It has 224 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 65 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 454 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GT 320 scores 470 and the GeForce 9800M GTX reaches 454 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 320 is built on Pascal while the GeForce 9800M GTX uses G9x, both on 14 nm vs 65 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 320) vs 224 (GeForce 9800M GTX).
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | GeForce 9800M GTX |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 470+4% | 454 |
| Architecture | Pascal | G9x |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+71% | 224 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | GeForce 9800M GTX |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 1 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | GeForce 9800M GTX |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce GT 320) vs 10.0 (GeForce 9800M GTX). Vulkan: N/A vs None. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 1.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | GeForce 9800M GTX |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | None |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2+100% | 1 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce GT 320) vs No (GeForce 9800M GTX). Decoder: PureVideo HD (VP4) vs PureVideo HD VP3. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GT 320) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (GeForce 9800M GTX).
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | GeForce 9800M GTX |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | No |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD (VP4) | PureVideo HD VP3 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GT 320 draws 30W versus the GeForce 9800M GTX's 150W — a 133.3% difference. The GeForce GT 320 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 250W (GeForce GT 320) vs 350W (GeForce 9800M GTX). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 175mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 90°C.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | GeForce 9800M GTX |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-80% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 250W-29% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 175mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 75-17% | 90°C |
| Perf/Watt | 15.7+423% | 3.0 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GT 320 launched at $79 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the GeForce 9800M GTX launched at $300 and now averages $30. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 15.7 (GeForce GT 320) vs 15.1 (GeForce 9800M GTX) — the GeForce GT 320 offers 4% better value. The GeForce GT 320 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | GeForce 9800M GTX |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $79-74% | $300 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 15.7+4% | 15.1 |
| Codename | GP108 | NB9E-GTX |
| Release | May 17 2017 | July 15 2008 |
| Ranking | #641 | #825 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GT 320 and GeForce 9800M GTX
