RTX 2000 Ada Generation vs GMA X3500

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated72
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data81.28
Power efficiencyno data45.41
ArchitectureGeneration 4.0 (2006−2007)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameBearlakeAD107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date1 August 2007 (17 years ago)12 February 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$649

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 data2816
Core clock speed667 MHz1620 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2130 MHz
Number of transistorsno data18,900 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate5.336187.4
Floating-point processing powerno data12 TFLOPS
ROPs148
TMUs888
Tensor Coresno data88
Ray Tracing Coresno data22

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data168 mm
WidthIGP2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared16 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data256.0 GB/s

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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.8
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.9

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 August 2007 12 February 2024
Chip lithography 90 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 70 Watt

GMA X3500 has 438.5% lower power consumption.

RTX 2000 Ada Generation, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 16 years, and a 1700% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GMA X3500 and RTX 2000 Ada Generation. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GMA X3500 is a desktop card while RTX 2000 Ada Generation is a workstation 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.


Intel GMA X3500
GMA X3500
NVIDIA RTX 2000 Ada Generation
RTX 2000 Ada Generation

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.


3.2 11 votes

Rate GMA X3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 24 votes

Rate RTX 2000 Ada Generation 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.