Xbox Series X GPU vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900

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
ArchitectureGen. 3 (2005)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGMA 900Scarlett
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 March 2005 (19 years ago)10 November 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$499

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 cores43328
Core clock speedno data1825 MHz
Boost clock speed400 MHz1725 MHz
Number of transistorsno data15,300 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data200 Watt
Texture fill rateno data379.6
Floating-point processing powerno data12.15 TFLOPS
ROPsno data64
TMUsno data208

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).

Interfaceno dataIGP
Lengthno data301 mm
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data10 GB
Memory bus widthno data320 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data560.0 GB/s
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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectXno data12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2005 10 November 2020
Chip lithography 130 nm 7 nm

Xbox Series X GPU has an age advantage of 15 years, and a 1757.1% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 and Xbox Series X GPU. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 is a notebook card while Xbox Series X GPU is a desktop 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 Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900
AMD Xbox Series X GPU
Xbox Series X GPU

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.


3.1 18 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 1233 votes

Rate Xbox Series X GPU 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.