RTX A400 vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated417
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data15.57
ArchitecturePowerVR SGX5 (2008−2011)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameCedar TrailGA107
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 November 2011 (13 years ago)16 April 2024 (less than a year 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 cores4768
Core clock speedno data727 MHz
Boost clock speed400 MHz1762 MHz
Number of transistorsno data8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data42.29
Floating-point processing powerno data2.706 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data24
Tensor Coresno data24
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data163 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountno data4 GB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data96 GB/s
Shared memory+-

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 Connectorsno data4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectXno data12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data3.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-8.6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 November 2011 16 April 2024
Chip lithography 32 nm 8 nm

RTX A400 has an age advantage of 12 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 and RTX A400. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 is a notebook card while RTX A400 is a workstation one.


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.


Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600
NVIDIA RTX A400
RTX A400

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.


2.5 134 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 11 votes

Rate RTX A400 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.