GeForce4 Ti 4800 vs Radeon IGP 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.

GeForce4 Ti 4800 vs Radeon IGP 320M FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce4 Ti 4800 vs Radeon IGP 320M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce4 Ti 4800

2010

Why buy it

✅+50% higher PassMark G3D performance.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 0.0 vs 0 G3D/$ ($399 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌2010 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌194.1% higher power demand at 250W vs 85W.

Radeon IGP 320M

2019

Why buy it

✅GeForce4 Ti 4800 is already obsolete for modern gaming, so Radeon IGP 320M is the less risky modern option long term.
✅Draws 85W instead of 250W, a 165W reduction.
✅More future proof: RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) on 7nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark G3D performance (4 vs 6).
❌Older hardware, 512 MB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 0.0 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $399 MSRP).

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce4 Ti 4800 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 50% in PassMark G3D (6 vs 4), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

Radeon IGP 320M is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: the newer upscaling stack, FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 (2025) instead of no meaningful modern upscaling stack, a 7nm process instead of 40nm, and a newer 2019 generation instead of 2010. That makes it the less risky pick as game demands keep moving.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce4 Ti 4800 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, GeForce4 Ti 4800 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, Radeon IGP 320M has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce4 Ti 4800 vs Radeon IGP 320M Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce4 Ti 4800

The GeForce4 Ti 4800 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 26 2010. It features the Fermi architecture. The core clock speed is 700 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 6 points. Launch price was $499.

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 GeForce4 Ti 4800 scores 6 versus the Radeon IGP 320M's 4 — the GeForce4 Ti 4800 leads by 50%. The GeForce4 Ti 4800 is built on Fermi while the Radeon IGP 320M uses RDNA 1.0, both on 40 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 480 (GeForce4 Ti 4800) vs 1,280 (Radeon IGP 320M). Raw compute: 1.345 TFLOPS (GeForce4 Ti 4800) vs 3.2 TFLOPS (Radeon IGP 320M).

Feature	GeForce4 Ti 4800	Radeon IGP 320M
G3D Mark Score	6+50%	4
Architecture	Fermi	RDNA 1.0
Process Node	40 nm	7 nm
Shading Units	480	1280+167%
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.345 TFLOPS	3.2 TFLOPS+138%
ROPs	48+50%	32
TMUs	60	80+33%
L2 Cache	0.75 MB	2 MB+167%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce4 Ti 4800 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon IGP 320M leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce4 Ti 4800	Radeon IGP 320M
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards ship with 512 MB of GDDR5. Memory bus width is 64-bit on the GeForce4 Ti 4800 and 64-bit on the Radeon IGP 320M. L2 Cache: 0.75 MB (GeForce4 Ti 4800) vs 2 MB (Radeon IGP 320M) — the Radeon IGP 320M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce4 Ti 4800	Radeon IGP 320M
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	0.75 MB	2 MB+167%

🖥️

Display & API Support

Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce4 Ti 4800	Radeon IGP 320M
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: No (GeForce4 Ti 4800) vs None (Radeon IGP 320M). Decoder: No vs None.

Feature	GeForce4 Ti 4800	Radeon IGP 320M
Encoder	No	None
Decoder	No	None
Codecs		MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce4 Ti 4800 draws 250W versus the Radeon IGP 320M's 85W — a 98.5% difference. The Radeon IGP 320M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce4 Ti 4800) vs 350W (Radeon IGP 320M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.

Feature	GeForce4 Ti 4800	Radeon IGP 320M
TDP	250W	85W-66%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	PCIe-powered
Length	216mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	1	0-100%
Temp (Load)	65°C	—
Perf/Watt	0.0	0.0

💰

Value Analysis

The newer card here is Radeon IGP 320M (2019 vs 2010).

Feature	GeForce4 Ti 4800	Radeon IGP 320M
MSRP	$399	—
Codename	GF100	Navi 14
Release	March 26 2010	November 13 2019
Ranking	#488	#403

Search GeForce4 Ti 4800 on Amazon

Search Radeon IGP 320M on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.