ATI Radeon X1900 GT vs GRID M3-3020
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GRID M3-3020 with Radeon X1900 GT, including specs and performance data.
M3-3020 outperforms X1900 by a whopping 1920% 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 | 587 | 1347 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 0.36 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | R500 (2005−2007) |
| GPU code name | GM107 | R580 |
| Market segment | Workstation | Desktop |
| Release date | 18 May 2016 (9 years ago) | 1 May 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 | 640 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 1033 MHz | 575 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1306 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,870 million | 384 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 75 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 52.24 | 6.900 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.672 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 12 |
| TMUs | 40 | 12 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 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 | 267 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 8-pin | 1x 6-pin |
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 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1300 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 83.2 GB/s | 38.4 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 | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.0 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | N/A |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | N/A |
| CUDA | 5.0 | - |
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 | 7.07 | 0.35 |
| Recency | 18 May 2016 | 1 May 2006 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 256 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 90 nm |
GRID M3-3020 has a 1920% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.
The GRID M3-3020 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1900 GT in performance tests.
Be aware that GRID M3-3020 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon X1900 GT 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.
