Radeon 680M vs ATI FireGL X3-256

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated338
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data21.95
ArchitectureR400 (2004−2008)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameR420Rembrandt+
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date3 August 2004 (20 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,099 no data

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 data768
Core clock speed491 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2200 MHz
Number of transistors160 million13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)57 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate5.892105.6
Floating-point processing powerno data3.379 TFLOPS
ROPs1232
TMUs1248
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 8xPCIe 4.0 x8
Width1-slotno data
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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed454 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth29.06 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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-VideoPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0b (9_2)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 August 2004 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 130 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 57 Watt 50 Watt

Radeon 680M has an age advantage of 18 years, a 2066.7% more advanced lithography process, and 14% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FireGL X3-256 and Radeon 680M. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that FireGL X3-256 is a workstation card while Radeon 680M is a notebook 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 X3-256
FireGL X3-256
AMD Radeon 680M
Radeon 680M

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.


5 1 vote

Rate FireGL X3-256 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 950 votes

Rate Radeon 680M 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.