Radeon RX Vega 3 vs ATI FireGL X2-256

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the rankingnot rated772
Place by popularitynot in top-10086
Power efficiencyno data14.33
ArchitectureRage 9 (2003−2006)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameR360Picasso
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date1 March 2003 (21 year ago)6 January 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA coresno data192
Core clock speed380 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1001 MHz
Number of transistors117 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rate3.04012.01
Floating-point processing powerno data0.3844 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs812

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfaceAGP 8xIGP
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x MolexNone

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeDDR2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed350 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth22.4 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data-

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX9.012 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2003 6 January 2019
Chip lithography 150 nm 14 nm

RX Vega 3 has an age advantage of 15 years, and a 971.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between FireGL X2-256 and Radeon RX Vega 3. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that FireGL X2-256 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon RX Vega 3 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


ATI FireGL X2-256
FireGL X2-256
AMD Radeon RX Vega 3
Radeon RX Vega 3

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate FireGL X2-256 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1946 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.