Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 vs HD Graphics 2000

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking1222not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGen. 6 Sandy Bridge (2011)Gen. 4 (2007−2010)
GPU code nameSandy BridgeCrestline
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 February 2011 (13 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 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 cores68
Core clock speed850/1100 MHz500 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology32 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)unknown13.5 Watt
Texture fill rate8.100no data
Floating-point performance0.1296 gflopsno data

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16no data

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.

Maximum RAM amountSystem Sharedno data
Memory bus width64/128 Bitno data
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 outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)10
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.1no data
OpenCLN/Ano data
VulkanN/A-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 February 2011 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 32 nm 90 nm

HD Graphics 2000 has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 181.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between HD Graphics 2000 and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100. 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 HD Graphics 2000
HD Graphics 2000
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100

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.


2.7 1248 votes

Rate HD Graphics 2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 153 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 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.