Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 vs GeForce G 102M
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | PowerVR SGX5 (2008−2011) |
| GPU code name | MCP75 | Cedar Trail |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 March 2009 (17 years ago) | 1 November 2011 (14 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 16 | 4 |
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 640 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 282 Million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 32 nm |
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 type | DDR2, DDR3 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | no data |
| Shared memory | + | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 3 March 2009 | 1 November 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 32 nm |
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650 has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 103% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce G 102M and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3650. We've got no test results to judge.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
