Radeon RX 6300M vs ATI X1900 GT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X1900 GT with Radeon RX 6300M, including specs and performance data.


ATI X1900 GT
2006
256 MB GDDR3, 75 Watt
0.35

6300M outperforms X1900 by a whopping 4286% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1354381
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.3633.77
ArchitectureR500 (2005−2007)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameR580Navi 24
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 May 2006 (19 years ago)4 January 2022 (4 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 data768
Core clock speed575 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2400 MHz
Number of transistors384 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate6.900115.2
Floating-point processing powerno data3.686 TFLOPS
ROPs1232
TMUs1248
Ray Tracing Coresno data12
L0 Cacheno data192 KB
L1 Cacheno data256 KB
L2 Cacheno data1024 KB
L3 Cacheno data8 MB

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 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit32 Bit
Memory clock speed600 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth38.4 GB/s72 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

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-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.6
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A2.2
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 0.35
RX 6300M 15.35
+4286%

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
RX 6300M 6421
+4328%
Samples: 5

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Dota 2 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Far Cry 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Dota 2 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 60 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.35 15.35
Recency 1 May 2006 4 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 35 Watt

RX 6300M has a 4286% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 1400% more advanced lithography process, and 114% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6300M 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 Radeon RX 6300M is a notebook one.

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
3.6 14 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6300M 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 Radeon RX 6300M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.