ATI Radeon 9000 vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100

Primary details

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

Place in performance rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGen. 4 (2007−2010)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameCrestlineRV250
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date9 May 2007 (17 years ago)1 July 2002 (22 years ago)

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores8no data
Core clock speed500 MHz250 MHz
Number of transistorsno data36 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13.5 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rateno data1.000

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 dataAGP 4x
Widthno data1-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 dataDDR
Maximum RAM amountno data64 MB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data400 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data6.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no 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 Connectorsno data1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX108.1
OpenGLno data1.4
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 May 2007 1 July 2002
Chip lithography 90 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 28 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 has an age advantage of 4 years, a 66.7% more advanced lithography process, and 115.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 and Radeon 9000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 is a notebook card while Radeon 9000 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) X3100
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100
ATI Radeon 9000
Radeon 9000

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.


3.6 153 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 27 votes

Rate Radeon 9000 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.