Radeon R5 M320 vs GeForce GT 320
Radeon R5 M320
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 Radeon R5 M320 is positioned at rank 578 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 Radeon R5 M320
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 320
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R5 M320 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.1% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce GT 320 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon R5 M320 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN (2012−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GT 320 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GT 320 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $150), it costs 80% less, resulting in a 394.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R5 M320 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+394.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) | ✅More affordable ($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 Radeon R5 M320 and GeForce GT 320
Radeon R5 M320
The Radeon R5 M320 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 9 2015. It features the GCN architecture. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 475 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 Radeon R5 M320 scores 475 and the GeForce GT 320 reaches 470 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R5 M320 is built on GCN while the GeForce GT 320 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (Radeon R5 M320) vs 384 (GeForce GT 320).
| Feature | Radeon R5 M320 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 475+1% | 470 |
| Architecture | GCN | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 1024+167% | 384 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R5 M320 | 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)
The Radeon R5 M320 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GT 320 has 1 GB. The GeForce GT 320 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon R5 M320 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 1 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R5 M320 draws 75W versus the GeForce GT 320's 30W — a 85.7% difference. The GeForce GT 320 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R5 M320) vs 250W (GeForce GT 320). Power connectors: Mobile vs None.
| Feature | Radeon R5 M320 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 30W-60% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 250W-29% |
| Power Connector | Mobile | None |
| Length | — | 175mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 6.3 | 15.7+149% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R5 M320 launched at $150 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the GeForce GT 320 launched at $79 and now averages $30. The GeForce GT 320 costs 80% less ($120 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 3.2 (Radeon R5 M320) vs 15.7 (GeForce GT 320) — the GeForce GT 320 offers 390.6% better value. The GeForce GT 320 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2015).
| Feature | Radeon R5 M320 | GeForce GT 320 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $150 | $79-47% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $30-80% |
| Performance per Dollar | 3.2 | 15.7+391% |
| Codename | Pitcairn | GP108 |
| Release | June 9 2015 | May 17 2017 |
| Ranking | #522 | #641 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R5 M320 and GeForce GT 320
