ATI Radeon 9200 PRO vs ATI X1650 XT AGP

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated1535
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data0.02
ArchitectureR500 (2005−2007)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameRV560RV280
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date30 October 2006 (18 years ago)1 May 2003 (21 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.

Core clock speed540 MHz239 MHz
Number of transistors330 million36 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt28 Watt
Texture fill rate4.3200.96
ROPs84
TMUs84

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).

InterfaceAGP 8xAGP 8x
Width1-slot1-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 typeGDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount512 MB128 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed680 MHz164 MHz
Memory bandwidth21.76 GB/s5.248 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)8.1
Shader Model3.0no data
OpenGL2.01.4
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 30 October 2006 1 May 2003
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 128 MB
Chip lithography 80 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 28 Watt

ATI X1650 XT AGP has an age advantage of 3 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 87.5% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 9200 PRO, on the other hand, has 96.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon X1650 XT AGP and Radeon 9200 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.


ATI Radeon X1650 XT AGP
Radeon X1650 XT AGP
ATI Radeon 9200 PRO
Radeon 9200 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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon X1650 XT AGP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 6 votes

Rate Radeon 9200 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.