Xe Arctic Sound vs GMA X4500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGeneration 5.0 (2008)Generation 12.5 (2021−2023)
GPU code nameEaglelakeArctic Sound
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 June 2008 (16 years ago)no data (2024 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 cores804096
Core clock speed533 MHz900 MHz
Number of transistorsno data8,000 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13 Watt500 Watt
Texture fill rate2.132230.4
Floating-point processing powerno data7.373 TFLOPS
ROPs4128
TMUs4256

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 x16
Lengthno data267 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 SharedHBM2e
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared32 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared4096 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2.4 GB/s
Memory bandwidthno data1,229 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX10.012 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.5
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 65 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 500 Watt

GMA X4500 has 3746.2% lower power consumption.

Xe Arctic Sound, on the other hand, has a 550% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GMA X4500 and Xe Arctic Sound. We've got no test results to judge.


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 X4500
GMA X4500
Intel Xe Arctic Sound
Xe Arctic Sound

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.


3.3 328 votes

Rate GMA X4500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Xe Arctic Sound 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.