Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 vs Quadro FX 1300

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1460not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.11no data
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)PowerVR SGX5 (2008−2011)
GPU code nameNV38Cedar Trail
Market segmentWorkstationLaptop
Release date9 August 2004 (20 years ago)1 November 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 coresno data4
Core clock speed350 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data400 MHz
Number of transistors135 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology130 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Wattno data
Texture fill rate2.800no data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no 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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16no data
Length241 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDRno data
Maximum RAM amount128 MBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed275 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth17.6 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Videono data

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0ano data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCLN/Ano data
VulkanN/A-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 August 2004 1 November 2011
Chip lithography 130 nm 32 nm

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 has an age advantage of 7 years, and a 306.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Quadro FX 1300 and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1300 is a workstation card while Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


NVIDIA Quadro FX 1300
Quadro FX 1300
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro FX 1300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 138 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 3600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.