Radeon RX 550X vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated586
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data8.28
ArchitectureGen. 4 (2007−2010)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameCrestlineLexa
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date9 May 2007 (17 years ago)16 December 2018 (5 years 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 cores8512
Core clock speed500 MHz1100 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1183 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,200 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13.5 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data37.86
Floating-point processing powerno data1.211 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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 3.0 x8
Lengthno data145 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 dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data96 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 data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX1012 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 May 2007 16 December 2018
Chip lithography 90 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 50 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 has 284.6% lower power consumption.

RX 550X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 and Radeon RX 550X. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 is a notebook card while Radeon RX 550X 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
AMD Radeon RX 550X
Radeon RX 550X

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
3.6 114 votes

Rate Radeon RX 550X 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.