GeForce Go 6100 vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1557 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Gen. 5 Arrandale (2010) | no data |
| GPU code name | GMA HD | C51MV |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 10 January 2010 (16 years ago) | 1 February 2006 (20 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 12 | 3 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 1 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 425 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 45 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | no 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 type | no data | shared Memory |
| Shared memory | + | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | shared Memory |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 10 January 2010 | 1 February 2006 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 110 nm |
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 144% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) HD Graphics and GeForce Go 6100. We've got no test results to judge.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
