GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 320M vs 220 among all GPUs

Gaming

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more

Graphics

T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more

Computing

Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Noise and Power

TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more

6.1

Overall Score

Winner
Nvidia GeForce GT 320M 

GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GT 320M  based on its .

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of GeForce GT 320M

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GT 320M

Report a correction
Lower TDP 23W vs 58W 2.5x lower TDP
Front view of GeForce GT 220

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GT 220

Report a correction
Slightly more texture mapping units 16 vs 8 Twice as many texture mapping units

Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GT 320M vs 220

T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench

GeForce GT 320M
1,777.54
GeForce GT 220
1,831.27

Features Key features of the GeForce GT 320M  vs 220 

memory bandwidth Rate at which data can be read from or stored in onboard memory

GeForce GT 320M
25.28 GB/s
GeForce GT 220
22.4 GB/s

pixel rate Number of pixels a graphics card can render to the screen every second

GeForce GT 320M
4 GPixel/s
GeForce GT 220
4.05 GPixel/s

texture rate Speed at which a graphics card can perform texture mapping

GeForce GT 320M
4 GTexel/s
GeForce GT 220
8.1 GTexel/s

floating point performance How fast the gpu can crunch numbers

GeForce GT 320M
52.8 GFLOPS
GeForce GT 220
97.15 GFLOPS

shading units Subcomponents of the gpu, these run in parallel to enable fast pixel shading

texture mapping units Built into each gpu, these resize and rotate bitmaps for texturing scenes

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus