RTX A1000 vs Radeon Graphics 384SP

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated197
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data39.03
ArchitectureGCN 5.1 (2018−2022)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameCezanneGA107
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date13 April 2021 (3 years ago)16 April 2024 (less than a year 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 cores3842304
Core clock speed300 MHz727 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHz1462 MHz
Number of transistors9,800 million8,700 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate40.80105.3
Floating-point processing power1.306 TFLOPS6.737 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs2472
Tensor Coresno data72
Ray Tracing Coresno data18

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x8
Lengthno data163 mm
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data192.0 GB/s
Shared memory+-

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 outputs4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)6.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.31.3
CUDA-8.6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 13 April 2021 16 April 2024
Chip lithography 7 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 50 Watt

Graphics 384SP has a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 11.1% lower power consumption.

RTX A1000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Graphics 384SP and RTX A1000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Graphics 384SP is a desktop card while RTX A1000 is a workstation 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 Graphics 384SP
Radeon Graphics 384SP
NVIDIA RTX A1000
RTX A1000

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.


4.4 20 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics 384SP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 16 votes

Rate RTX A1000 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.