CPU
GPU
Mobility Radeon HD 4670
Popular choices:
GeForce GT 320
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 Mobility Radeon HD 4670 is positioned at rank 418 and the GeForce GT 320 is on rank 201, 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 Mobility Radeon HD 4670
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 320
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 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2009 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| 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 | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+47.8%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($20) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30) |
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 Mobility Radeon HD 4670 and GeForce GT 320
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.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Mobility Radeon HD 4670 scores 463 and the GeForce GT 320 reaches 470 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.5% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Mobility Radeon HD 4670 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce GT 320 uses Pascal, both on 55 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 800 (Mobility Radeon HD 4670) vs 384 (GeForce GT 320). Raw compute: 0.88 TFLOPS (Mobility Radeon HD 4670) vs 1.127 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 320).
| Feature | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 463 | 470+2% |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Pascal |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+108% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.88 TFLOPS | 1.127 TFLOPS+28% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40+67% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB+11% | 144 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 1 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Mobility Radeon HD 4670) vs 512 KB (GeForce GT 320) — the GeForce GT 320 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 512 KB+100% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.1 (Mobility Radeon HD 4670) vs 10.1 (GeForce GT 320). Vulkan: N/A vs N/A. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.1 | 10.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Mobility Radeon HD 4670) vs None (GeForce GT 320). Decoder: UVD 2.2 vs PureVideo HD (VP4). Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Mobility Radeon HD 4670) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GT 320).
| Feature | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | None |
| Decoder | UVD 2.2 | PureVideo HD (VP4) |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Mobility Radeon HD 4670 draws 30W versus the GeForce GT 320's 30W — a 0% difference. The GeForce GT 320 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Mobility Radeon HD 4670) vs 250W (GeForce GT 320). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Card length: 0mm vs 175mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70 vs 75.
| Feature | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W | 30W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 250W-29% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | 0mm | 175mm |
| Height | 0mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 70-7% | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 15.4 | 15.7+2% |
Value Analysis
The Mobility Radeon HD 4670 launched at $67 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the GeForce GT 320 launched at $79 and now averages $30. The Mobility Radeon HD 4670 costs 33.3% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 23.1 (Mobility Radeon HD 4670) vs 15.7 (GeForce GT 320) — the Mobility Radeon HD 4670 offers 47.1% better value. The GeForce GT 320 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2009).
| Feature | Mobility Radeon HD 4670 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $67-15% | $79 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20-33% | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 23.1+47% | 15.7 |
| Codename | M98 | GP108 |
| Release | January 9 2009 | May 17 2017 |
| Ranking | #927 | #641 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Mobility Radeon HD 4670 and GeForce GT 320
