Radeon Vega 8 Efficient vs ATI HD 2900 XT

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking930not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.05no data
Power efficiency0.55no data
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameR600Raven
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date14 May 2007 (17 years ago)23 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$399 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores320512
Core clock speed743 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1100 MHz
Number of transistors720 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)215 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate11.8935.20
Floating-point processing power0.4755 TFLOPS1.126 TFLOPS
ROPs168
TMUs1632

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 x16IGP
Length241 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinNone

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 amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width512 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed828 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth106.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX10.0 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A2.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 14 May 2007 23 April 2018
Chip lithography 80 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 215 Watt 35 Watt

Vega 8 Efficient has an age advantage of 10 years, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 514.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 2900 XT and Radeon Vega 8 Efficient. 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.


ATI Radeon HD 2900 XT
Radeon HD 2900 XT
AMD Radeon Vega 8 Efficient
Radeon Vega 8 Efficient

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.


3.8 64 votes

Rate Radeon HD 2900 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 56 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 8 Efficient 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.