Radeon R9 280X2 vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGen. 4 (2007−2010)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameCrestlineTahiti
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date9 May 2007 (18 years ago)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 cores82048 ×2
Core clock speed500 MHz950 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1000 MHz
Number of transistorsno data4,313 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)13.5 Watt375 Watt
Texture fill rateno data128.0 ×2
Floating-point processing powerno data4.096 TFLOPS ×2
ROPsno data32 ×2
TMUsno data128 ×2
L1 Cacheno data512 KB
L2 Cacheno data768 KB

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 3.0 x16
Lengthno data315 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data3x 8-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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data3 GB ×2
Memory bus widthno data384 Bit ×2
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data288.0 GB/s ×2
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 data6x mini-DisplayPort 1.2

API and SDK support

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

DirectX1012 (11_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5 (5.1)
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.1 (1.2)
Vulkan-1.2.170

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 90 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 13 Watt 375 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 has 2784.6% lower power consumption.

R9 280X2, on the other hand, has a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 and Radeon R9 280X2. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon R9 280X2 is a desktop one.

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) X3100
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100
AMD Radeon R9 280X2
Radeon R9 280X2

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.


3.5 162 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Radeon R9 280X2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 or Radeon R9 280X2, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.