CPU
GPU
GeForce2 MX
Popular choices:
Radeon IGP 320M
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 GeForce2 MX is positioned at rank 754 and the Radeon IGP 320M is on rank 412, so the Radeon IGP 320M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce2 MX
Performance Per Dollar Radeon IGP 320M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon IGP 320M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 33.3% higher G3D Mark score and 693.7% more VRAM (512 MB vs 65 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce2 MX.
| Insight | GeForce2 MX | Radeon IGP 320M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-33.3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+33.3%) |
| Longevity | Ampere (2020−2025) (8nm) | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) (7nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+693.7%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon IGP 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce2 MX and Radeon IGP 320M
GeForce2 MX
The GeForce2 MX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in Maio 2022. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 832 MHz to 1155 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 16 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.
Radeon IGP 320M
The Radeon IGP 320M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 13 2019. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 MHz to 1250 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 85W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce2 MX scores 3 versus the Radeon IGP 320M's 4 — the Radeon IGP 320M leads by 33.3%. The GeForce2 MX is built on Ampere while the Radeon IGP 320M uses RDNA 1.0, both on 8 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GeForce2 MX) vs 1,280 (Radeon IGP 320M). Raw compute: 4.731 TFLOPS (GeForce2 MX) vs 3.2 TFLOPS (Radeon IGP 320M). Boost clocks: 1155 MHz vs 1250 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | Radeon IGP 320M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3 | 4+33% |
| Architecture | Ampere | RDNA 1.0 |
| Process Node | 8 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+60% | 1280 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.731 TFLOPS+48% | 3.2 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1155 MHz | 1250 MHz+8% |
| ROPs | 40+25% | 32 |
| TMUs | 64 | 80+25% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | Radeon IGP 320M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GeForce2 MX comes with 65 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon IGP 320M has 512 MB. The Radeon IGP 320M offers 693.7% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | Radeon IGP 320M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.063 GB | 0.5 GB+694% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 2 MB |
Display & API Support
Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | Radeon IGP 320M |
|---|---|---|
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (GeForce2 MX) vs None (Radeon IGP 320M). Decoder: MPEG-2 Decoder vs None. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (GeForce2 MX) vs MPEG-2 (Radeon IGP 320M).
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | Radeon IGP 320M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | MPEG-2 Decoder | None |
| Codecs | MPEG-2 | MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce2 MX draws 25W versus the Radeon IGP 320M's 85W — a 109.1% difference. The GeForce2 MX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce2 MX) vs 350W (Radeon IGP 320M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | Radeon IGP 320M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 25W-71% | 85W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 160mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 60°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.1 | 0.0 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce2 MX is the newer GPU (2022 vs 2019).
| Feature | GeForce2 MX | Radeon IGP 320M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | — |
| Codename | GA107 | Navi 14 |
| Release | Maio 2022 | November 13 2019 |
| Ranking | #407 | #403 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce2 MX and Radeon IGP 320M
