Radeon IGP 320M vs RADEON 9250
Radeon IGP 320M
Popular choices:
RADEON 9250
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 320M is positioned at rank 412 and the RADEON 9250 is on rank 748, 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 Radeon IGP 320M
Performance Per Dollar RADEON 9250
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 RADEON 9250 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 and 100% more VRAM (512 MB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the RADEON 9250.
| Insight | Radeon IGP 320M | RADEON 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+33.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-33.3%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) (7nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon IGP 320M and RADEON 9250
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.
RADEON 9250
The RADEON 9250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in September 29 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 735 MHz to 1000 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 95W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Radeon IGP 320M scores 4 versus the RADEON 9250's 3 — the Radeon IGP 320M leads by 33.3%. The Radeon IGP 320M is built on RDNA 1.0 while the RADEON 9250 uses GCN 3.0, both on 7 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 1,280 (Radeon IGP 320M) vs 2,048 (RADEON 9250). Raw compute: 3.2 TFLOPS (Radeon IGP 320M) vs 4.096 TFLOPS (RADEON 9250). Boost clocks: 1250 MHz vs 1000 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon IGP 320M | RADEON 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4+33% | 3 |
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280 | 2048+60% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.2 TFLOPS | 4.096 TFLOPS+28% |
| Boost Clock | 1250 MHz+25% | 1000 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 32 |
| TMUs | 80 | 128+60% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon IGP 320M | RADEON 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon IGP 320M comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the RADEON 9250 has 256 MB. The Radeon IGP 320M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Radeon IGP 320M) vs 0.5 MB (RADEON 9250) — the Radeon IGP 320M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon IGP 320M | RADEON 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+100% | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+300% | 0.5 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon IGP 320M draws 85W versus the RADEON 9250's 95W — a 11.1% difference. The Radeon IGP 320M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon IGP 320M) vs 350W (RADEON 9250). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.
| Feature | Radeon IGP 320M | RADEON 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 85W-11% | 95W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.0 | 0.0 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon IGP 320M is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2015).
| Feature | Radeon IGP 320M | RADEON 9250 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $79 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $25 |
| Codename | Navi 14 | Amethyst |
| Release | November 13 2019 | September 29 2015 |
| Ranking | #403 | #420 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon IGP 320M and RADEON 9250
