AMD Radeon R5 M320 vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data for these two GPUs comes from different test suites, reflecting their very different positions in the market. The NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB posts a score of 4791 in the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, while the AMD Radeon R5 M320 records a Geekbench OpenCL score of 5051 and a Geekbench Vulkan score of 4262. Direct cross-comparison is complicated by the lack of shared benchmarks, but the percentile rankings place them nearly side-by-side: the RTX 3080 sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the R5 M320 sits at the 27th percentile.

Looking at the nearest rivals for the RTX 3080, the data shows a remarkably tight cluster. The AMD Radeon R5 M255 scores 4788, just 0.1% behind the RTX 3080’s 4791. The AMD Radeon R5 M335 trails by 0.8% with a score of 4752. On the other side, the NVIDIA GeForce 940MX leads by 1.1% at 4844, and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560M is 1.3% ahead at 4855. This is a stunning result for a flagship Ampere card — it suggests that in the 3DMark Steel Nomad workload, the RTX 3080 12 GB is effectively trading blows with entry-level mobile GPUs from several generations ago.

The R5 M320’s rival set tells a different story. Its average benchmark score is 4657, and it sits exactly level with the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB, which also averages 4657 — a 0% delta. The NVIDIA Quadro P400 is 0.6% ahead at 4684, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M trails by 0.6% at 4628 and the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M is 0.8% behind at 4621. Here again, the data shows a dense pack of competitors, but the R5 M320 is not being outpaced by modern hardware; it is holding its own against a mix of workstation and mobile parts.

The most striking interpretation from the numbers is that both GPUs occupy nearly the same percentile territory despite being separated by roughly seven years of architectural evolution. The RTX 3080 12 GB’s 3DMark score of 4791 places it just 2.8% above the R5 M320’s average of 4657, yet the RTX 3080 carries a 350 W TDP and the R5 M320 is an integrated graphics processor with no listed TDP. The performance-per-watt gap is not calculable from the available data, but the raw score proximity is undeniable.

# Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3080 12 GB wins decisively in raw compute throughput. Its FP32 performance is listed at 30.64 TFLOPS, a figure that dwarfs the R5 M320’s 547.2 GFLOPS — a difference of more than 56 times. The texture rate follows the same pattern: 478.8 GTexel/s versus 17.10 GTexel/s, a 28-fold advantage. Pixel throughput is similarly lopsided at 164.2 GPixel/s versus 6.840 GPixel/s, roughly 24 times higher. For any workload that stresses shading units, texture fetch, or rasterization, the RTX 3080 is in a different universe.

Memory bandwidth is another area of total dominance. The RTX 3080 12 GB accesses 912.4 GB/s through a 384-bit bus, while the R5 M320 manages 16.00 GB/s over a 64-bit bus. That is a 57-fold difference in bandwidth, which directly impacts resolution scaling, texture-heavy scenes, and compute tasks that stream large datasets. The RTX 3080 also holds 12 GB of GDDR6X memory compared to 4 GB of DDR3, giving it three times the capacity and a vastly faster memory type.

However, the R5 M320 wins in the integrated graphics domain by simply existing as an IGP. Its slot width is listed as "IGP," meaning it occupies no expansion slot and draws no dedicated power connector. The RTX 3080 is a dual-slot card requiring a 1x 12-pin connector and a 750 W suggested PSU. For a portable or low-power system, the R5 M320 is the only viable option between the two. Its display outputs are "Portable Device Dependent," indicating it is designed for laptops or compact devices where the RTX 3080’s 285 mm length and 112 mm height would never fit.

In API support, the RTX 3080 leads with DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the R5 M320 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) — a full feature level behind. Vulkan support also favors NVIDIA at version 1.4 versus AMD’s 1.2.170. OpenGL is identical at 4.6. For ray tracing and tensor workloads, the RTX 3080 has 70 RT cores and 280 tensor cores; the R5 M320 has none listed.

# Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different design philosophies and manufacturing eras. The RTX 3080 12 GB is built on NVIDIA’s Ampere architecture using the GA102 chip, fabricated on Samsung’s 8 nm process. The die measures 628 mm² and contains 28,300 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 45.1 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the R5 M320 uses AMD’s GCN 1.0 architecture with the Jet chip, built on TSMC’s 28 nm process. Its die is just 56 mm² with 690 million transistors, giving a density of 12.3 million per square millimeter. The RTX 3080 packs roughly 41 times more transistors into 11 times the die area.

The compute configuration reflects this scale difference. The RTX 3080 12 GB has 8,960 shading units, 280 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. The R5 M320 has 320 shading units, 20 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That is 28 times more shading units, 14 times more TMUs, and 12 times more ROPs. The RTX 3080 also carries dedicated hardware accelerators — 70 RT cores for ray tracing and 280 tensor cores for AI workloads — which have no equivalent in the R5 M320’s feature set.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The RTX 3080 12 GB boosts to 1710 MHz from a base of 1260 MHz, while the R5 M320 boosts to 855 MHz from a base of 780 MHz. The NVIDIA part runs at roughly double the frequency, but the gap in execution units is far larger than the clock difference. Memory clocks are even more divergent: the RTX 3080’s GDDR6X runs at 1188 MHz with a 19 Gbps effective data rate, while the R5 M320’s DDR3 runs at 1000 MHz with a 2 Gbps effective rate.

The bus interfaces differ as well. The RTX 3080 uses PCIe 4.0 x16, while the R5 M320 uses PCIe 3.0 x8. This halves the available bandwidth for the AMD part even before considering the memory system. Production status is end-of-life for both, but the release dates are far apart: the RTX 3080 launched on January 10, 2022, while the R5 M320 arrived on May 4, 2015. The RTX 3080’s predecessor is the GeForce 20 series and its successor is GeForce 40; the R5 M320’s predecessor is the Solar System generation and its successor is Polaris Mobile.

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw FP32 compute performance?

A: The RTX 3080 12 GB delivers 30.64 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to the R5 M320’s 547.2 GFLOPS. This represents a more than 56-fold advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: How do the two compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The RTX 3080 12 GB offers 912.4 GB/s of bandwidth over a 384-bit bus with GDDR6X memory, while the R5 M320 provides 16.00 GB/s over a 64-bit bus with DDR3. The NVIDIA part has roughly 57 times the bandwidth.

Q: Are these two GPUs in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, they are very close. The RTX 3080 12 GB sits at the 28th percentile of all GPUs, while the R5 M320 sits at the 27th percentile. Their average benchmark scores are 4791 and 4657, respectively.

Q: Does the R5 M320 support ray tracing?

A: No. The R5 M320 has no RT cores listed, whereas the RTX 3080 12 GB includes 70 RT cores and 280 tensor cores for ray tracing and AI workloads.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The RTX 3080 12 GB has a 350 W TDP and requires a 750 W suggested PSU with a 1x 12-pin connector. The R5 M320 has no TDP listed, no power connectors, and is classified as an IGP (integrated graphics processor).

Q: Which GPU has better API support?

A: The RTX 3080 12 GB supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the R5 M320 supports DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 12 GB | AMD Radeon R5 M320 |

|---|---|---|

| Architecture | Ampere | GCN 1.0 |

| Chip | GA102 | Jet |

| Process Node | 8 nm (Samsung) | 28 nm (TSMC) |

| Transistors | 28,300 million | 690 million |

| Die Size | 628 mm² | 56 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 45.1M / mm² | 12.3M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1260 MHz | 780 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1710 MHz | 855 MHz |

| Memory Size | 12 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6X | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 384 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 912.4 GB/s | 16.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 8960 | 320 |

| TMUs | 280 | 20 |

| ROPs | 96 | 8 |

| RT Cores | 70 | None |

| Tensor Cores | 280 | None |

| Pixel Rate | 164.2 GPixel/s | 6.840 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 478.8 GTexel/s | 17.10 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 30.64 TFLOPS | 547.2 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 350 W | Not listed |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | 1x 12-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 750 W | Not listed |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | 12 (11_1) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2022-01-10 | 2015-05-04 |

| Launch MSRP | 799 USD | Not listed |

| Dimensions | 285 mm x 112 mm x 40 mm | Not listed |