ATI FireGL X1-256 vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking660not rated
Place by popularity38not in top-100
Power efficiency20.63no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Rage 8 (2002−2007)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeR300
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date26 October 2017 (7 years ago)1 July 2002 (22 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 cores512no data
Core clock speed300 MHz325 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistors9,800 million110 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt37 Watt
Texture fill rate57.602.600
Floating-point processing power1.843 TFLOPSno data
ROPs88
TMUs328

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).

InterfaceIGPAGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeSystem SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared256 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared310 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data19.84 GB/s
Shared memory-no 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 outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)9.0 (9_0)
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL2.1N/A
Vulkan1.2N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 26 October 2017 1 July 2002
Chip lithography 14 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 37 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has an age advantage of 15 years, a 971.4% more advanced lithography process, and 146.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and FireGL X1-256. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while FireGL X1-256 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.


AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
ATI FireGL X1-256
FireGL X1-256

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.


3.5 1454 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate FireGL X1-256 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.