GMA 3000 vs Radeon RX Vega XL

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 5.0 (2017−2020)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameVega 10Broadwater
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date8 August 2017 (7 years ago)1 June 2006 (18 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 cores3584no data
Core clock speed1500 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1630 MHzno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)225 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate365.11.600
ROPs644
TMUs2244

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 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinno 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 typeHBM2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount8 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width2048 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1890 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth483.8 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 HDMI, 3x DisplayPortNo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12.09.0c
Shader Model5.03.0
OpenGL4.52.0
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan-N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 8 August 2017 1 June 2006
Chip lithography 14 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 225 Watt 13 Watt

RX Vega XL has an age advantage of 11 years, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.

GMA 3000, on the other hand, has 1630.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega XL and GMA 3000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega XL is a desktop card while GMA 3000 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 RX Vega XL
Radeon RX Vega XL
Intel GMA 3000
GMA 3000

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 RX Vega XL on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 45 votes

Rate GMA 3000 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.