Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 vs Radeon R5 230

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1205not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.09no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)PowerVR SGX5 (2008−2011)
GPU code nameCaicosCedar Trail
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date3 April 2014 (10 years ago)1 November 2011 (13 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 cores1604
Boost clock speedno data400 MHz
Number of transistors370 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology40 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Wattno data
Texture fill rate5.000no data
Floating-point processing power0.2 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no 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).

Bus supportPCIe 1.0 x4no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsN/Ano 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 typeDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGAno data
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire+-
​PowerPlay+no data
DDMA audio-no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 11no data
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCL1.2no data

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 April 2014 1 November 2011
Chip lithography 40 nm 32 nm

R5 230 has an age advantage of 2 years.

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600, on the other hand, has a 25% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R5 230 and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R5 230 is a desktop card while Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 is a notebook 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 R5 230
Radeon R5 230
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600

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.


2.8 238 votes

Rate Radeon R5 230 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 134 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 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.