Tegra 3 vs Radeon E9171 MCM

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
ArchitectureGCN 4.0 (2016−2020)VLIW Vec4 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameLexaTegra 3
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date3 October 2017 (7 years ago)9 November 2011 (13 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 cores512no data
Core clock speed1124 MHz416 MHz
Boost clock speed1219 MHz520 MHz
Number of transistors2,200 million10 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate39.014.160
Floating-point processing power1.248 TFLOPSno data
ROPs168
TMUs328

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 3.0 x8IGP
Widthno dataIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1500 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth96 GB/sno 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)N/A
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6ES 2.0
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 October 2017 9 November 2011
Chip lithography 14 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 20 Watt

E9171 MCM has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

Tegra 3, on the other hand, has 100% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon E9171 MCM and Tegra 3. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon E9171 MCM is a notebook card while Tegra 3 is a desktop 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.


AMD Radeon E9171 MCM
Radeon E9171 MCM
NVIDIA Tegra 3
Tegra 3

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.


3 2 votes

Rate Radeon E9171 MCM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 5 votes

Rate Tegra 3 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.