ATI Radeon Xpress 1150 vs ION 2
Aggregate performance score
We've compared ION 2 and Radeon Xpress 1150, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
ION 2 outperforms ATI Xpress 1150 by a whopping 329% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1363 | 1515 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.14 | no data |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | Rage 9 (2003−2006) |
| GPU code name | GT218 | RS485 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 June 2008 (17 years ago) | 23 May 2006 (19 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 cores | 16 | 6 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 260 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 4.000 | 0.8 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.03424 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 2 |
| TMUs | 8 | 2 |
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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | System Shared | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | System Shared |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 9.0 |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 2.0 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | 1.2 | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+8.7%
|
21−24
−8.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+8.7%
|
21−24
−8.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+8.7%
|
21−24
−8.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the ION 2 is 200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- ION 2 is ahead in 12 tests (48%)
- there's a draw in 13 tests (52%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.30 | 0.07 |
| Recency | 3 June 2008 | 23 May 2006 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 110 nm |
ION 2 has a 328.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 175% more advanced lithography process.
The ION 2 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Xpress 1150 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
