GMA X3000 vs GeForce FX 5900 Ultra

VS

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
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameNV35Broadwater
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date23 October 2003 (21 year ago)1 June 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 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.

Core clock speed450 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors135 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology130 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)59 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate3.6004.000
ROPs41
TMUs88

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 1.0 x16
Length218 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x Molexno data

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 typeDDRSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed425 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth27.2 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0a9.0c
Shader Modelno data3.0
OpenGL1.5 (2.1)2.0
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 October 2003 1 June 2006
Chip lithography 130 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 59 Watt 13 Watt

GMA X3000 has an age advantage of 2 years, a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 353.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce FX 5900 Ultra and GMA X3000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce FX 5900 Ultra is a desktop card while GMA X3000 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.


NVIDIA GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
GeForce FX 5900 Ultra
Intel GMA X3000
GMA X3000

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.


3.5 6 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5900 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 28 votes

Rate GMA X3000 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.