GMA X4500 vs RSX Reality Synthesizer

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Generation 5.0 (2008)
GPU code nameRSX-CXD5302Eaglelake
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date4 October 2012 (12 years ago)1 June 2008 (16 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 coresno data80
Core clock speed550 MHz533 MHz
Number of transistors302 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate13.202.132
ROPs84
TMUs244

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 1.0 x16
WidthIGPIGP

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1400 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth22.4 GB/sno 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectXN/A10.0
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLES 1.12.0
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 4 October 2012 1 June 2008
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 13 Watt

RSX Reality Synthesizer has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 62.5% more advanced lithography process.

GMA X4500, on the other hand, has 515.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between RSX Reality Synthesizer and GMA X4500. 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.


NVIDIA RSX Reality Synthesizer
RSX Reality Synthesizer
Intel GMA X4500
GMA X4500

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 30 votes

Rate RSX Reality Synthesizer on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 330 votes

Rate GMA X4500 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.