Radeon IGP 320M vs GeForce2 MX 100/200

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. The Radeon IGP 320M is positioned at rank #412 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Radeon IGP 320M

#397

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

113638%

#412

Radeon IGP 320M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#413

GRID P4-1Q

MSRP: $5890|Avg: $185

92%

#415

GRID RTX6000-2Q

MSRP: $6300|Avg: $1500

77%

#417

GRID M60-0B

MSRP: $19900|Avg: $19900

69%

#418

Quadro FX 4500 X2

MSRP: $2799|Avg: $2799

62%

#419

Quadro FX 5500

MSRP: $2999|Avg: $30

62%

#420

Quadro FX 1000

MSRP: $500|Avg: $30

54%

#421

Quadro FX 3400/4400

MSRP: $1799|Avg: $50

46%

#422

Quadro FX 1300

MSRP: $599|Avg: $15

46%

#423

Quadro FX 4000

MSRP: $2199|Avg: $50

38%

#424

RADEON IGP 320

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

31%

#425

Quadro FX 500/FX 600

MSRP: $449|Avg: $15

15%

#426

Quadro FX 2000

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $40

8%

#427

GRID V100-8Q

MSRP: $10000|Avg: $10000

0%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The Radeon IGP 320M uses modern memory architecture. The Radeon IGP 320M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce2 MX 100/200 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Radeon IGP 320M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 33.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce2 MX 100/200.

Insight	Radeon IGP 320M	GeForce2 MX 100/200
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+33.3%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-33.3%)
Longevity	RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) (7nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021))
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

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.

Radeon IGP 320M Benchmark Check

GeForce2 MX 100/200 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon IGP 320M and GeForce2 MX 100/200

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.

GeForce2 MX 100/200

The GeForce2 MX 100/200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. 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: 3 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the Radeon IGP 320M scores 4 versus the GeForce2 MX 100/200's 3 — the Radeon IGP 320M leads by 33.3%. The Radeon IGP 320M is built on RDNA 1.0 while the GeForce2 MX 100/200 uses Pascal, both on 7 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,280 (Radeon IGP 320M) vs 384 (GeForce2 MX 100/200). Raw compute: 3.2 TFLOPS (Radeon IGP 320M) vs 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce2 MX 100/200). Boost clocks: 1250 MHz vs 1038 MHz.

Feature	Radeon IGP 320M	GeForce2 MX 100/200
G3D Mark Score	4+33%	3
Architecture	RDNA 1.0	Pascal
Process Node	7 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	1280+233%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	3.2 TFLOPS+301%	0.7972 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1250 MHz+20%	1038 MHz
ROPs	32+100%	16
TMUs	80+233%	24
L2 Cache	2 MB+300%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon IGP 320M	GeForce2 MX 100/200
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 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Radeon IGP 320M) vs 0.5 MB (GeForce2 MX 100/200) — the Radeon IGP 320M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	Radeon IGP 320M	GeForce2 MX 100/200
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	2 MB+300%	0.5 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	Radeon IGP 320M	GeForce2 MX 100/200
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (Radeon IGP 320M) vs None (GeForce2 MX 100/200). Decoder: None vs None. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (Radeon IGP 320M) vs MPEG-2 (GeForce2 MX 100/200).

Feature	Radeon IGP 320M	GeForce2 MX 100/200
Encoder	None	None
Decoder	None	None
Codecs	MPEG-2	MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon IGP 320M draws 85W versus the GeForce2 MX 100/200's 10W — a 157.9% difference. The GeForce2 MX 100/200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon IGP 320M) vs 350W (GeForce2 MX 100/200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.