GMA X3100 vs GeForce 9800 GT

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1036not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.04no data
Power efficiency0.69no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameG92Broadwater
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date21 July 2008 (16 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$160 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores112no data
Core clock speed600 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors754 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)105 Watt13 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate33.604.000
Floating-point processing power0.336 TFLOPSno data
ROPs161
TMUs568

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 2.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Height1-slotno data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth57.6 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsHDTVDual Link DVINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)9.0c
Shader Model4.03.0
OpenGL2.12.0
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 21 July 2008 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 65 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 105 Watt 13 Watt

9800 GT has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.

GMA X3100, on the other hand, has 707.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 9800 GT and GMA X3100. We've got no test results to judge.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GT
GeForce 9800 GT
Intel GMA X3100
GMA X3100

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.


3.3 1429 votes

Rate GeForce 9800 GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 57 votes

Rate GMA X3100 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.