ATI Radeon X1050 vs FirePro D300
Aggregate performance score
We've compared FirePro D300 with Radeon X1050, including specs and performance data.
D300 outperforms X1050 by a whopping 7625% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 514 | 1508 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 4.76 | 0.39 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) | Rage 9 (2003−2006) |
| GPU code name | Pitcairn | RV370 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 18 January 2014 (12 years ago) | 7 December 2006 (19 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 cores | 1280 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,800 million | 107 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 24 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 68.00 | 1.600 |
| Floating-point processing power | 2.176 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 32 | 4 |
| TMUs | 80 | 4 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | no 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).
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | 242 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | GDDR5 | DDR2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 128 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1270 MHz | 333 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 162.6 GB/s | 5.328 GB/s |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 4x DisplayPort | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 9.0 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.0 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.27 | 0.12 |
| Recency | 18 January 2014 | 7 December 2006 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 128 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 24 Watt |
FirePro D300 has a 7625% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 293% more advanced lithography process.
ATI X1050, on the other hand, has 525% lower power consumption.
The FirePro D300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1050 in performance tests.
Be aware that FirePro D300 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon X1050 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
