RADEON IGP 320 vs GeForce 256
RADEON IGP 320
Popular choices:
GeForce 256
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 RADEON IGP 320 is positioned at rank 424 and the GeForce 256 is on rank 750, so the RADEON IGP 320 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar RADEON IGP 320
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 256
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 256 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 25% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the RADEON IGP 320.
| Insight | RADEON IGP 320 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-25%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+25%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (7nm) | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 256 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $20 (vs $20), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 25% better value per dollar than the RADEON IGP 320.
| Insight | RADEON IGP 320 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+25%) |
| 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 RADEON IGP 320 and GeForce 256
RADEON IGP 320
The RADEON IGP 320 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 4 2021. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1825 MHz to 2200 MHz. It has 4608 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 300W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. It features 72 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points.
GeForce 256
The GeForce 256 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 20 2019. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 937 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the RADEON IGP 320 scores 4 versus the GeForce 256's 5 — the GeForce 256 leads by 25%. The RADEON IGP 320 is built on RDNA 2.0 while the GeForce 256 uses Pascal, both on 7 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 4,608 (RADEON IGP 320) vs 384 (GeForce 256). Raw compute: 20.28 TFLOPS (RADEON IGP 320) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 256). Boost clocks: 2200 MHz vs 1038 MHz.
| Feature | RADEON IGP 320 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4 | 5+25% |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 4608+1100% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 20.28 TFLOPS+2444% | 0.7972 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 2200 MHz+112% | 1038 MHz |
| ROPs | 128+700% | 16 |
| TMUs | 288+1100% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 1 MB+614% | 0.14 MB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+700% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RADEON IGP 320 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 4 MB (RADEON IGP 320) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce 256) — the RADEON IGP 320 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RADEON IGP 320 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB+700% | 0.5 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The RADEON IGP 320 draws 300W versus the GeForce 256's 10W — a 187.1% difference. The GeForce 256 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (RADEON IGP 320) vs 350W (GeForce 256). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy.
| Feature | RADEON IGP 320 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 300W | 10W-97% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | — | 165mm |
| Height | — | 100mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 60°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.0 | 0.5 |
Value Analysis
The RADEON IGP 320 launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the GeForce 256 launched at $199 and now averages $20. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.2 (RADEON IGP 320) vs 0.3 (GeForce 256) — the GeForce 256 offers 50% better value. The RADEON IGP 320 is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2019).
| Feature | RADEON IGP 320 | GeForce 256 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-50% | $199 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | $20 |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.2 | 0.3+50% |
| Codename | Navi 21 | GP108B |
| Release | November 4 2021 | February 20 2019 |
| Ranking | #136 | #643 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on RADEON IGP 320 and GeForce 256
