ATI Radeon 9000 vs ATI X1650

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
ArchitectureR500 (2005−2007)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameRV516RV250
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date20 November 2007 (16 years ago)1 July 2002 (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.

Core clock speed635 MHz250 MHz
Number of transistors107 million36 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data28 Watt
Texture fill rate2.5401.000
ROPs44
TMUs44

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 1.0 x16AGP 4x
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 typeDDR2DDR
Maximum RAM amount256 MB64 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed392 MHz200 MHz
Memory bandwidth6.272 GB/s6.4 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 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

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.

ATI X1650 71
+1675%
ATI 9000 4

Pros & cons summary


Recency 20 November 2007 1 July 2002
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 64 MB
Chip lithography 80 nm 150 nm

ATI X1650 has an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 87.5% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon X1650 and Radeon 9000. 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
Radeon X1650
ATI Radeon 9000
Radeon 9000

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 65 votes

Rate Radeon X1650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 30 votes

Rate Radeon 9000 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.