GMA X4500 vs Qualcomm Adreno 690

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking812not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency26.85no data
Architectureno dataGeneration 5.0 (2008)
GPU code nameno dataEaglelake
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date6 December 2018 (6 years ago)1 June 2008 (16 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 coresno data80
Core clock speedno data533 MHz
Manufacturing process technology5 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rateno data2.132
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data4

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 1.0 x16
Widthno dataIGP

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 dataSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountno dataSystem Shared
Memory bus widthno dataSystem Shared
Memory clock speedno dataSystem Shared
Shared memory+no 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX1210.0
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data2.0
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 December 2018 1 June 2008
Chip lithography 5 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 13 Watt

Qualcomm Adreno 690 has an age advantage of 10 years, a 1200% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Qualcomm Adreno 690 and GMA X4500. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Qualcomm Adreno 690 is a notebook card while GMA X4500 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.


Qualcomm Adreno 690
Adreno 690
Intel GMA X4500
GMA X4500

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.


2.5 11 votes

Rate Qualcomm Adreno 690 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 351 vote

Rate GMA X4500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Qualcomm Adreno 690 or GMA X4500, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.