ATI Radeon X1650 PRO vs R9 270X

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking393not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.64no data
Power efficiency4.87no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Ultra-Threaded SE (2005−2007)
GPU code nameCuracaoRV530
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)1 February 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1280no data
Core clock speedno data600 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million157 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt44 Watt
Texture fill rate84.002.400
Floating-point processing power2.688 TFLOPSno data
ROPs324
TMUs804

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB256 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data700 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s22.4 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 129.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.2N/A
Vulkan+N/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R9 270X 4869
+5696%
ATI X1650 PRO 84

Pros & cons summary


Recency 8 October 2013 1 February 2007
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 44 Watt

R9 270X has an age advantage of 6 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

ATI X1650 PRO, on the other hand, has 309.1% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R9 270X and Radeon X1650 PRO. We've got no test results to judge.


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 R9 270X
Radeon R9 270X
ATI Radeon X1650 PRO
Radeon X1650 PRO

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.


4 741 vote

Rate Radeon R9 270X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 69 votes

Rate Radeon X1650 PRO 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.