Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 vs GeForce GT 220M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1329not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.08no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Gen. 4 (2007−2010)
GPU code nameG96CCrestline
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 June 2009 (16 years ago)9 May 2007 (18 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 cores328
Core clock speed500 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors314 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt13.5 Watt
Texture fill rate8.000no data
Floating-point processing power0.08 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs16no data
L2 Cache32 KBno 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).

InterfaceMXM-IIno 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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount512 MBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed800 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 June 2009 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 55 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 13 Watt

GT 220M has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 63.6% more advanced lithography process.

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100, on the other hand, has 7.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 220M and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100. We've got no test results to judge.

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 GT 220M
GeForce GT 220M
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100

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.


3.1 100 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 163 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GT 220M or Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.