Xbox XGPU-S vs Radeon Vega 3 Efficient

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
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 5.0 (2017−2020)Kelvin (2001−2003)
GPU code nameRavenNV2A
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date26 May 2018 (6 years ago)15 November 2001 (22 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 cores192no data
Core clock speed300 MHz233 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors4,940 million57 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Wattno data
Texture fill rate12.001.864
Floating-point processing power0.384 TFLOPSno data
ROPs44
TMUs128

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).

InterfaceIGPAGP 4x
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared64 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared200 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data6.4 GB/s

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_1)8.1
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.61.4
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.2.131N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 26 May 2018 15 November 2001
Chip lithography 14 nm 150 nm

Vega 3 Efficient has an age advantage of 16 years, and a 971.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Vega 3 Efficient and Xbox XGPU-S. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Vega 3 Efficient is a desktop card while Xbox XGPU-S 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 Vega 3 Efficient
Radeon Vega 3 Efficient
NVIDIA Xbox XGPU-S
Xbox XGPU-S

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.


3.4 44 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 3 Efficient on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 6 votes

Rate Xbox XGPU-S 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.