Radeon Next vs ATI Graphics Ultra Pro

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

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
Architectureno dataGCN 6.0
GPU code nameMach32Navi 10
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 January 1993 (32 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.

Core clock speed10 MHz1000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1000 MHz
Manufacturing process technology800 nm7 nm
ROPs1no 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).

InterfaceVLBPCIe 3.0 x16
Width1-slotno 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 typeVRAMno data
Maximum RAM amount1 MBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed10 MHz14000 MHz
Memory bandwidth80.0 MB/sno data

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 Connectors1x VGANo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXNone12.0 (12_1)
OpenGLNone4.6
OpenCLNoneno data

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 800 nm 7 nm

Radeon Next has a 11328.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Ultra Pro and Radeon Next. 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.


ATI Graphics Ultra Pro
Graphics Ultra Pro
AMD Radeon Next
Radeon Next

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.


4.6 10 votes

Rate Graphics Ultra Pro on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon Next on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Graphics Ultra Pro or Radeon Next, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.