AMD Radeon R5 M320 vs AMD Radeon Vega 3 Comparison

The AMD Radeon Vega 3 and AMD Radeon R5 M320 are both end-of-life mobile graphics solutions, but they represent very different approaches to integrated graphics. The Vega 3 is a modern IGP built into AMD's Picasso APUs, while the R5 M320 is a discrete-class part from the older Gem System generation. Benchmark results show a clear, though not overwhelming, performance advantage for the older R5 M320 in the two shared tests, but the newer Vega 3 brings architectural efficiencies and API support that change the value proposition.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data from the head-to-head comparison is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon R5 M320 wins both benchmark tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the R5 M320 scores 5051, which is 21.5% higher than the Vega 3's 3963. This is a significant margin, indicating that the R5 M320's dedicated memory and higher raw compute throughput provide a tangible advantage in compute-heavy workloads. The gap narrows considerably in the Geekbench Vulkan test, where the R5 M320 scores 4262, a 7.1% advantage over the Vega 3's 3961. This smaller delta suggests that the Vega 3's newer architecture helps it close the gap in modern, low-level graphics APIs.

Looking at the broader benchmark context, the Vega 3's average benchmark score of 4268 places it in the 25th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460M (4282, +0.6% delta) and the AMD FirePro W2100 (4295, +0.6% delta), showing it performs in line with older mid-range discrete parts. The R5 M320, with an average score of 4657, sits in the 27th percentile, and its nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, which has an identical average score of 4657 (0% delta). This is a remarkable data point, showing the R5 M320's performance is on par with a much newer, higher-end card in this specific aggregate metric, though the comparison is skewed by the R5 M320's strong OpenCL showing.

The wins are split 0-2 in favor of the R5 M320, but the Vulkan result is particularly telling. The Vega 3's 7.1% deficit in Vulkan, compared to a 21.5% deficit in OpenCL, indicates that its GCN 5.0 architecture is more efficient at handling modern graphics workloads. For users running older DirectX 11 or OpenCL applications, the R5 M320 is the clear performance pick. For those using Vulkan, the experience will be much closer, and the Vega 3's other advantages may tip the scales.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are separated by several generations of AMD's design philosophy. The Vega 3 is built on the GCN 5.0 architecture, manufactured on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The R5 M320 uses the original GCN 1.0 architecture and is fabbed on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This process difference is substantial, with the Vega 3's 12 nm node allowing for a transistor density of 23.5M / mm², compared to just 12.3M / mm² for the R5 M320.

The chip designs are fundamentally different in scale. The Vega 3's Picasso chip contains 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die, while the R5 M320's Jet chip has just 690 million transistors on a 56 mm² die. However, the R5 M320 dedicates more of its silicon to graphics. It has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs, compared to the Vega 3's 192 shading units, 12 TMUs, and 4 ROPs. This gives the R5 M320 higher theoretical peak rates: 6.840 GPixel/s pixel rate and 17.10 GTexel/s texture rate, versus the Vega 3's 4.400 GPixel/s and 13.20 GTexel/s. The R5 M320 also leads in FP32 compute at 547.2 GFLOPS versus 422.4 GFLOPS.

The memory subsystems are where the architectures diverge most sharply. The Vega 3 uses System Shared memory, meaning its performance is entirely dependent on the host system's RAM and bandwidth. The R5 M320 has dedicated memory: 4 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, providing 16.00 GB/s of bandwidth. This dedicated memory is a primary reason for its benchmark lead, as it avoids contention with the CPU. The Vega 3's clocks are also lower, with a 300 MHz base and 1100 MHz boost, compared to the R5 M320's 780 MHz base and 855 MHz boost, though the Vega 3's boost clock is higher than the R5's.

The Vega 3's advantage lies in its modern feature set. It supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3, while the R5 M320 is limited to DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. The Vega 3 also supports FP16 compute at 844.8 GFLOPS (2:1 ratio), a feature the R5 M320 lacks entirely. The Vega 3 is an IGP with a 15 W TDP, while the R5 M320's TDP is not specified, though it is also listed as an IGP, suggesting it is a low-power part for laptops.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon R5 M320 has a higher average benchmark score of 4657, which places it in the 27th percentile of all GPUs. The AMD Radeon Vega 3 scores 4268, placing it in the 25th percentile.

Q: Is the R5 M320 faster in every benchmark test?

A: Yes, in the head-to-head tests, the R5 M320 wins both Geekbench OpenCL (5051 vs 3963) and Geekbench Vulkan (4262 vs 3961). However, its margin of victory is much larger in OpenCL (21.5%) than in Vulkan (7.1%).

Q: Why does the R5 M320 have a significant advantage in OpenCL?

A: The R5 M320 has a dedicated 4 GB DDR3 memory pool with 16.00 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the Vega 3 relies on System Shared memory. This dedicated memory, combined with a higher number of shading units (320 vs 192), provides a substantial advantage in compute-heavy OpenCL workloads.

Q: What architectural feature allows the Vega 3 to close the gap in Vulkan?

A: The Vega 3 is built on the newer GCN 5.0 architecture and supports Vulkan 1.3, compared to the R5 M320's GCN 1.0 architecture and Vulkan 1.2.170 support. The newer architecture's efficiency in low-level APIs reduces the performance gap to just 7.1%.

Q: Are these GPUs comparable in terms of manufacturing technology?

A: No. The Vega 3 is manufactured on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the R5 M320 is on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The Vega 3's newer process allows for a much higher transistor density of 23.5M / mm².

Q: Which GPU has a higher boost clock speed?

A: The Vega 3 has a higher boost clock of 1100 MHz, compared to the R5 M320's 855 MHz. However, the R5 M320 has a higher base clock of 780 MHz versus the Vega 3's 300 MHz.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear choice based on workload. For users prioritizing raw compute performance in legacy APIs like OpenCL, the AMD Radeon R5 M320 is the superior option. Its 21.5% lead in that test, driven by its dedicated 4 GB memory and 320 shading units, makes it the better choice for older applications and GPU-accelerated compute tasks.

However, the AMD Radeon Vega 3 is the more future-proof and efficient part. Its support for Vulkan 1.3 and DirectX 12 (12_1) ensures better compatibility with modern games and applications. The much smaller 7.1% deficit in Vulkan, despite having fewer shading units and relying on shared memory, demonstrates the architectural efficiency of GCN 5.0. The Vega 3 also supports FP16 compute, a feature absent on the R5 M320, which is increasingly relevant in AI and machine learning workloads.

The data also suggests the Vega 3's performance envelope is more competitive in its peer group. Its nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M, with just a 0.6% delta, while the R5 M320 matches the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB exactly. Ultimately, the R5 M320 is a faster GPU for pure compute, but the Vega 3 is a more balanced, modern solution that sacrifices some performance for architectural relevance and lower power consumption, evidenced by its 15 W TDP. The choice depends on whether the user needs maximum legacy compute or modern API compatibility.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon Vega 3 | AMD Radeon R5 M320 |

| :--- | :--- | :--- |

| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | GCN 1.0 |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | TSMC |

| Transistors | 4,940 million | 690 million |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | 56 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 23.5M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 300 MHz | 780 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1100 MHz | 855 MHz |

| Memory Size | System Shared | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | System Shared | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | System Shared | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | System Dependent | 16.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 192 | 320 |

| TMUs | 12 | 20 |

| ROPs | 4 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 4.400 GPixel/s | 6.840 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 13.20 GTexel/s | 17.10 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 422.4 GFLOPS | 547.2 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 844.8 GFLOPS (2:1) | null |

| TDP | 15 W | null |

| Bus Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.3 | 1.2.170 |