Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) vs ATI Radeon X1050

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X1050 with Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc), including specs and performance data.

ATI X1050
2006
128 MB DDR2, 24 Watt
0.13

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) outperforms ATI X1050 by a whopping 8062% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1437435
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.37no data
ArchitectureRage 9 (2003−2006)Xe LPG (2023)
GPU code nameRV370Meteor Lake iGPU
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date7 December 2006 (18 years ago)14 December 2023 (1 year 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 coresno data4
Core clock speed400 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1950 MHz
Number of transistors107 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology110 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)24 Wattno data
Texture fill rate1.600no data
ROPs4no data
TMUs4no 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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16no data
Width1-slotno data
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 typeDDR2no data
Maximum RAM amount128 MBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed333 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth5.328 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 VGA, 1x S-Videono data

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.012_2
OpenGL2.0no data
OpenCLN/Ano data
VulkanN/A-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD-0−126

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 39
+0%
39
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Hitman 3 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30
+0%
30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+0%
16
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Hitman 3 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 66 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.13 10.61
Recency 7 December 2006 14 December 2023
Chip lithography 110 nm 5 nm

Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) has a 8061.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, and a 2100% more advanced lithography process.

The Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1050 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon X1050 is a desktop card while Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 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.


ATI Radeon X1050
Radeon X1050
Intel Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)
Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc)

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.


3.6 20 votes

Rate Radeon X1050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 7 votes

Rate Graphics 4-Cores iGPU (Arc) 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.