GeForce GT 320 vs Mobility Radeon HD 4670
GeForce GT 320
Popular choices:
Mobility Radeon HD 4670
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 Mobility Radeon HD 4670 is on rank 418, 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 Mobility Radeon HD 4670
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GT 320 is significantly newer (2017 vs 2009). 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 Mobility Radeon HD 4670 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 1.5% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Mobility Radeon HD 4670.
| Insight | GeForce GT 320 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.5%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2009 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Mobility Radeon HD 4670 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Mobility Radeon HD 4670 holds the technical lead. Priced at $20 (vs $30), it costs 33% less, resulting in a 47.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GT 320 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+47.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30) | ✅More affordable ($20) |
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 Mobility Radeon HD 4670
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.
Mobility Radeon HD 4670
The Mobility Radeon HD 4670 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 9 2009. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 550 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 463 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GT 320 scores 470 and the Mobility Radeon HD 4670 reaches 463 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 320 is built on Pascal while the Mobility Radeon HD 4670 uses TeraScale, both on 14 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 320) vs 800 (Mobility Radeon HD 4670). Raw compute: 1.127 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 320) vs 0.88 TFLOPS (Mobility Radeon HD 4670).
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 470+2% | 463 |
| Architecture | Pascal | TeraScale |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 800+108% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.127 TFLOPS+28% | 0.88 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 24 | 40+67% |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB | 160 KB+11% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 1 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce GT 320) vs 256 KB (Mobility Radeon HD 4670) — the GeForce GT 320 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce GT 320) vs 10.1 (Mobility Radeon HD 4670). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce GT 320) vs None (Mobility Radeon HD 4670). Decoder: PureVideo HD (VP4) vs UVD 2.2. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GT 320) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Mobility Radeon HD 4670).
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD (VP4) | UVD 2.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GT 320 draws 30W versus the Mobility Radeon HD 4670's 30W — a 0% difference. The Mobility Radeon HD 4670 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 250W (GeForce GT 320) vs 350W (Mobility Radeon HD 4670). Power connectors: None vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 175mm vs 0mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 70.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W | 30W |
| Recommended PSU | 250W-29% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 175mm | 0mm |
| Height | 111mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | 70-7% |
| Perf/Watt | 15.7+2% | 15.4 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GT 320 launched at $79 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the Mobility Radeon HD 4670 launched at $67 and now averages $20. The Mobility Radeon HD 4670 costs 33.3% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 15.7 (GeForce GT 320) vs 23.1 (Mobility Radeon HD 4670) — the Mobility Radeon HD 4670 offers 47.1% better value. The GeForce GT 320 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2009).
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $79 | $67-15% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | $20-33% |
| Performance per Dollar | 15.7 | 23.1+47% |
| Codename | GP108 | M98 |
| Release | May 17 2017 | January 9 2009 |
| Ranking | #641 | #927 |
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 Mobility Radeon HD 4670
