ATI FireGL X3-256 vs ATI Radeon 9200 SE

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1532not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.02no data
ArchitectureRage 7 (2001−2006)R400 (2004−2008)
GPU code nameRV280R420
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date1 March 2003 (21 year ago)3 August 2004 (20 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$1,099

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.

Core clock speed200 MHz491 MHz
Number of transistors36 million160 million
Manufacturing process technology150 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)28 Watt57 Watt
Texture fill rate0.85.892
ROPs412
TMUs412

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).

InterfaceAGP 8xAGP 8x
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x Molex

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 typeDDRGDDR3
Maximum RAM amount64 MB256 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed166 MHz454 MHz
Memory bandwidth2.656 GB/s29.06 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX8.19.0b (9_2)
OpenGL1.42.0
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2003 3 August 2004
Maximum RAM amount 64 MB 256 MB
Chip lithography 150 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 28 Watt 57 Watt

ATI 9200 SE has 103.6% lower power consumption.

ATI FireGL X3-256, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 15.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon 9200 SE and FireGL X3-256. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon 9200 SE is a desktop card while FireGL X3-256 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.


ATI Radeon 9200 SE
Radeon 9200 SE
ATI FireGL X3-256
FireGL X3-256

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.


4.2 69 votes

Rate Radeon 9200 SE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate FireGL X3-256 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.