Arc A530M vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated304
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data19.01
ArchitectureGen. 4 (2007−2010)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameCrestlineDG2-256
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date9 May 2007 (17 years ago)1 August 2023 (1 year 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 cores81536
Core clock speed500 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1300 MHz
Number of transistorsno data11,500 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13.5 Watt65 Watt
Texture fill rateno data124.8
Floating-point processing powerno data3.994 TFLOPS
ROPsno data48
TMUsno data96
Tensor Coresno data192
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 dataPCIe 4.0 x8

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 data8 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data224.0 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 dataPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX1012 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.6
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 May 2007 1 August 2023
Chip lithography 90 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 65 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 has 400% lower power consumption.

Arc A530M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 16 years, and a 1400% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 and Arc A530M. 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 Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100
Intel Arc A530M
Arc A530M

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.


3.6 158 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 191 vote

Rate Arc A530M 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.