GeForce GT 320 vs Radeon R5 M240
GeForce GT 320
Popular choices:
Radeon R5 M240
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 Radeon R5 M240 is on rank 238, 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 Radeon R5 M240
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R5 M240 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce GT 320 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GT 320 | Radeon R5 M240 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R5 M240 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R5 M240 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $30), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 0.6% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GT 320 | Radeon R5 M240 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+0.6%) |
| 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 Radeon R5 M240
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.
Radeon R5 M240
The Radeon R5 M240 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 8 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 780 MHz. It has 320 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 473 points. Launch price was $69.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GT 320 scores 470 and the Radeon R5 M240 reaches 473 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 320 is built on Pascal while the Radeon R5 M240 uses GCN 1.0, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 320) vs 320 (Radeon R5 M240). Raw compute: 1.127 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 320) vs 0.448 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 M240). Boost clocks: 1468 MHz vs 780 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Radeon R5 M240 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 470 | 473 |
| Architecture | Pascal | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+20% | 320 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.127 TFLOPS+152% | 0.448 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1468 MHz+88% | 780 MHz |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 24+20% | 20 |
| L1 Cache | 144 KB+80% | 80 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Radeon R5 M240 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The GeForce GT 320 comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R5 M240 has 512 MB. The GeForce GT 320 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce GT 320) vs 256 KB (Radeon R5 M240) — the GeForce GT 320 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Radeon R5 M240 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB+100% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB+100% | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (GeForce GT 320) vs 12 (Radeon R5 M240). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 0.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Radeon R5 M240 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 12+19% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 0 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce GT 320) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R5 M240). Decoder: PureVideo HD (VP4) vs UVD 4.2.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Radeon R5 M240 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | VCE 1.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD (VP4) | UVD 4.2 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 | — |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GT 320 draws 30W versus the Radeon R5 M240's 30W — a 0% difference. The Radeon R5 M240 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 250W (GeForce GT 320) vs 350W (Radeon R5 M240). Power connectors: None vs Mobile. Card length: 175mm vs 1mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Radeon R5 M240 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W | 30W |
| Recommended PSU | 250W-29% | 350W |
| Power Connector | None | Mobile |
| Length | 175mm | 1mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 15.7 | 15.8 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GT 320 launched at $79 MSRP and currently averages $30, while the Radeon R5 M240 launched at $100 and now averages $30. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 15.7 (GeForce GT 320) vs 15.8 (Radeon R5 M240) — the Radeon R5 M240 offers 0.6% better value. The GeForce GT 320 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2013).
| Feature | GeForce GT 320 | Radeon R5 M240 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $79-21% | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30 | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 15.7 | 15.8 |
| Codename | GP108 | Oland |
| Release | May 17 2017 | October 8 2013 |
| Ranking | #641 | #911 |
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 Radeon R5 M240
