ATI Radeon X1300 PRO vs GeForce GTS 450

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTS 450 and Radeon X1300 PRO, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTS 450
2010
1 GB GDDR5, 106 Watt
3.42
+1455%

GTS 450 outperforms ATI X1300 PRO by a whopping 1455% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7281371
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.66no data
Power efficiency2.250.49
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)R500 (2005−2007)
GPU code nameGF106RV515
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date13 September 2010 (14 years ago)1 October 2005 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$129 no data

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 cores192no data
Core clock speed783 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors1,170 million107 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)106 Watt31 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature100 °Cno data
Texture fill rate25.062.400
Floating-point processing power0.6013 TFLOPSno data
ROPs164
TMUs324

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0 x 16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length210 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinNone
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount1 GB128 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1804 (3608 data rate) MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth57.7 GB/s12.8 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 ConnectorsMini HDMITwo Dual Link DVI1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.22.0
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTS 450 3.42
+1455%
ATI X1300 PRO 0.22

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTS 450 1318
+1469%
ATI X1300 PRO 84

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p30
+2900%
1−2
−2900%
Full HD38
+1800%
2−3
−1800%
1200p27
+2600%
1−2
−2600%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.39no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Battlefield 5 7−8 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Hitman 3 8−9 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Battlefield 5 7−8 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Hitman 3 8−9 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Hitman 3 8−9 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+2400%
1−2
−2400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+1950%
2−3
−1950%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 8−9 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1

This is how GTS 450 and ATI X1300 PRO compete in popular games:

  • GTS 450 is 2900% faster in 900p
  • GTS 450 is 1800% faster in 1080p
  • GTS 450 is 2600% faster in 1200p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.42 0.22
Recency 13 September 2010 1 October 2005
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 128 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 106 Watt 31 Watt

GTS 450 has a 1454.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 125% more advanced lithography process.

ATI X1300 PRO, on the other hand, has 241.9% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTS 450 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1300 PRO in performance tests.


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 GTS 450
GeForce GTS 450
ATI Radeon X1300 PRO
Radeon X1300 PRO

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.


3.6 2643 votes

Rate GeForce GTS 450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 33 votes

Rate Radeon X1300 PRO 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.