Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 vs ATI Radeon HD 3650

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
ArchitectureTeraScale (2005−2013)Gen. 4 (2007−2010)
GPU code nameRV635Crestline
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date20 January 2008 (16 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 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 cores1208
Core clock speed725 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors378 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt13.5 Watt
Texture fill rate5.800no data
Floating-point processing power0.174 TFLOPSno 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 2.0 x16no 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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount256 MBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed800 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Videono data

API compatibility

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

DirectX10.1 (10_1)10
Shader Model4.1no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCLN/Ano data
VulkanN/A-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 20 January 2008 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 55 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 13 Watt

ATI HD 3650 has an age advantage of 8 months, and a 63.6% more advanced lithography process.

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100, on the other hand, has 400% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 3650 and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 3650 is a desktop card while Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 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.


ATI Radeon HD 3650
Radeon HD 3650
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100

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.


3.7 89 votes

Rate Radeon HD 3650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 158 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 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.