UHD Graphics 770 vs ATI Radeon X1650

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X1650 and UHD Graphics 770, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI X1650
2007
256 MB DDR2
0.18

UHD Graphics 770 outperforms ATI X1650 by a whopping 3328% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1401583
Place by popularitynot in top-10031
Power efficiencyno data28.32
ArchitectureR500 (2005−2007)Generation 12.2 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameRV516Raptor Lake GT1
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date20 November 2007 (17 years ago)27 September 2022 (2 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 coresno data256
Core clock speed635 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1650 MHz
Number of transistors107 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology80 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data15 Watt
Texture fill rate2.54026.40
Floating-point processing powerno data0.8448 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs416

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 x16Ring Bus
Width1-slotIGP
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 typeDDR2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed392 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth6.272 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-VideoMotherboard Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 (12_1)
Shader Model3.06.6
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

ATI X1650 0.18
UHD Graphics 770 6.17
+3328%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

ATI X1650 71
UHD Graphics 770 1016
+1331%

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 HD0−119
4K-0−114

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+0%
12
+0%
Elden Ring 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5
+0%
5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 23
+0%
23
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 16
+0%
16
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 6
+0%
6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 20
+0%
20
+0%
Elden Ring 11
+0%
11
+0%
Far Cry 5 30
+0%
30
+0%
Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18
+0%
18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 9
+0%
9
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
World of Tanks 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+0%
16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Elden Ring 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
World of Tanks 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 14
+0%
14
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.18 6.17
Recency 20 November 2007 27 September 2022
Chip lithography 80 nm 10 nm

UHD Graphics 770 has a 3327.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.

The UHD Graphics 770 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1650 in performance tests.


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 X1650
Radeon X1650
Intel UHD Graphics 770
UHD Graphics 770

Other comparisons

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.


3.3 69 votes

Rate Radeon X1650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 1283 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 770 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.