GMA X3100 vs Radeon HD 8330

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1174not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.21no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Generation 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameKalindiBroadwater
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date13 August 2013 (11 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 cores128no data
Core clock speed497 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate3.9764.000
Floating-point processing power0.1272 TFLOPSno data
ROPs41
TMUs88

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 1.0 x16
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem SharedSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amountSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory bus widthSystem SharedSystem Shared
Memory clock speedSystem SharedSystem Shared
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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)9.0c
Shader Model6.33.0
OpenGL4.62.0
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 13 August 2013 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 13 Watt

HD 8330 has an age advantage of 6 years, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

GMA X3100, on the other hand, has 15.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8330 and GMA X3100. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8330 is a desktop card while 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.


AMD Radeon HD 8330
Radeon HD 8330
Intel GMA X3100
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.


2.8 177 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8330 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 57 votes

Rate 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.