Iris Plus Graphics 645 vs ATI Radeon X1900 GT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X1900 GT with Iris Plus Graphics 645, including specs and performance data.

ATI X1900 GT
2006
256 MB GDDR3, 75 Watt
0.33

Plus Graphics 645 outperforms X1900 by a whopping 1100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1341715
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.3621.31
ArchitectureR500 (2005−2007)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameR580Coffee Lake GT3e
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 May 2006 (19 years ago)7 October 2019 (6 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 coresno data384
Core clock speed575 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1050 MHz
Number of transistors384 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology90 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate6.90050.40
Floating-point processing powerno data0.8064 TFLOPS
ROPs126
TMUs1248

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 x16Ring Bus
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount256 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed600 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth38.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 (12_1)
Shader Model3.06.4
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3

Synthetic benchmarks

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

ATI X1900 GT 0.33
Iris Plus Graphics 645 3.96
+1100%

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 X1900 GT 145
Samples: 14
Iris Plus Graphics 645 1752
+1108%
Samples: 35

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD2−3
−1200%
26
+1200%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 29
+0%
29
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how ATI X1900 GT and Iris Plus Graphics 645 compete in popular games:

  • Iris Plus Graphics 645 is 1200% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.33 3.96
Recency 1 May 2006 7 October 2019
Chip lithography 90 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 15 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 645 has a 1100% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The Iris Plus Graphics 645 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1900 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon X1900 GT is a desktop graphics card while Iris Plus Graphics 645 is a notebook one.

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 X1900 GT
Radeon X1900 GT
Intel Iris Plus Graphics 645
Iris Plus Graphics 645

Other comparisons

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 38 votes

Rate Radeon X1900 GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 124 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 645 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon X1900 GT or Iris Plus Graphics 645, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.