Radeon R2 Graphics IGP (APU E2-4000) vs GeForce GT 320 OEM
Summary
Reasons to consider Radeon R2 Graphics IGP (APU E2-4000) |
| This is a much newer product, it might have better long term support. |
Reasons to consider GeForce GT 320 OEM |
| Based on an outdated architecture (Nvidia Tesla), there are no performance optimizations for current games and applications |
| PhysX support, however PhysX performance on newest games may be poor |
No clear winner declared
We have no data to declare a winner at this time.
Core Configuration
| Radeon R2 Graphics IGP (APU E2-4000) | | GeForce GT 320 OEM | |
|---|
| GPU Name | Mullins () | vs | GT215 (GT215-301-A3) |
| Fab Process | 28 nm | vs | 40 nm |
| Die Size | 0 mm² | vs | 144 mm² |
| Transistors | unknown | vs | 727 million |
| Shaders | 128 | vs | 72 |
| Compute Units | 2 | vs | 3 |
| Core clock | 700 MHz | vs | 540 MHz |
| ROPs | 4 | vs | 8 |
| TMUs | 8 | vs | 24 |
Memory Configuration
| Radeon R2 Graphics IGP (APU E2-4000) | | GeForce GT 320 OEM | |
|---|
| Memory Type | System Shared | vs | GDDR3 |
| Bus Width | System Shared | vs | 128 bit |
| Memory Speed | System Shared | vs | 790 MHz
1580 MHz effective |
| Memory Size | 0 Mb | vs | 1024 Mb |
Additional details
| Radeon R2 Graphics IGP (APU E2-4000) | | GeForce GT 320 OEM | |
|---|
| TDP | 15 watts | vs | 43 watts |
| Release Date | 27 Feb 2015 | vs | 2 Feb 2010 |
GigaPixels - higher is better
GigaTexels - higher is better
GFLOPs - higher is better