ATI Radeon X1650 GTO vs ATI Mobility HD 3670
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3670 with Radeon X1650 GTO, including specs and performance data.
Mobility HD 3670 outperforms X1650 GTO by a whopping 167% 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 | 1303 | 1472 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.23 | no data |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | R500 (2005−2007) |
| GPU code name | M86 | RV530 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 7 January 2008 (18 years ago) | 2 December 2007 (18 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 | 120 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 680 MHz | 587 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 378 million | 157 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 5.440 | 2.348 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1632 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 4 |
| TMUs | 8 | 4 |
| L2 Cache | 128 KB | no 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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| 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 | GDDR3 | DDR2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 392 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 12.54 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no 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 Connectors | No outputs | 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 2.0 |
| OpenCL | N/A | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
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
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+170%
|
10−11
−170%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 16−18
+183%
|
6−7
−183%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 10−12
+175%
|
4−5
−175%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+170%
|
10−11
−170%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 10−12
+175%
|
4−5
−175%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+170%
|
10−11
−170%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+180%
|
5−6
−180%
|
| Valorant | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.48 | 0.18 |
| Recency | 7 January 2008 | 2 December 2007 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 90 nm |
ATI Mobility HD 3670 has a 166.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 month, and a 63.6% more advanced lithography process.
The Mobility Radeon HD 3670 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1650 GTO in performance tests.
Be aware that Mobility Radeon HD 3670 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon X1650 GTO is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
