RTX A2000 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 rated139
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data85.71
Power efficiencyno data35.42
ArchitectureGen. 4 (2007−2010)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameCrestlineGA106
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date9 May 2007 (17 years ago)10 August 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$449

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 cores83328
Core clock speed500 MHz562 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1200 MHz
Number of transistorsno data12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13.5 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rateno data124.8
Floating-point processing powerno data7.987 TFLOPS
ROPsno data48
TMUsno data104
Tensor Coresno data104
Ray Tracing Coresno data26

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 x16
Lengthno data167 mm
Widthno data2-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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data6 GB
Memory bus widthno data192 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data288.0 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 data4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX1012 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.8
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 May 2007 10 August 2021
Chip lithography 90 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 70 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 has 438.5% lower power consumption.

RTX A2000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 14 years, and a 1025% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 and RTX A2000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 is a notebook card while RTX A2000 is a workstation 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) X3100
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100
NVIDIA RTX A2000
RTX A2000

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
3.9 567 votes

Rate RTX A2000 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.