GMA 3100 vs Radeon E9260 PCIe

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
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameBaffinBearlake
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date27 September 2016 (8 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 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 cores896no data
Core clock speed1090 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,000 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)80 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate57.601.600
Floating-point processing power2.15 TFLOPSno data
ROPs164
TMUs484

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 3.0 x8PCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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.

Memory typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1750 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth112.0 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.

DirectX12 (12_0)9.0c
Shader Model6.43.0
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 September 2016 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 14 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 80 Watt 13 Watt

E9260 PCIe has an age advantage of 9 years, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.

GMA 3100, on the other hand, has 515.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon E9260 PCIe and GMA 3100. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon E9260 PCIe is a notebook card while GMA 3100 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.


AMD Radeon E9260 PCIe
Radeon E9260 PCIe
Intel GMA 3100
GMA 3100

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon E9260 PCIe on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 278 votes

Rate GMA 3100 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.