Arc A380 vs ATI Radeon X1950 PRO

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X1950 PRO and Arc A380, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI X1950 PRO
2006
256 MB GDDR3, 66 Watt
0.29

Arc A380 outperforms ATI X1950 PRO by a whopping 5490% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1338334
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data43.73
Power efficiency0.3014.88
ArchitectureR500 (2005−2007)Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code nameRV570DG2-128
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 October 2006 (18 years ago)14 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 data1024
Core clock speed575 MHz2000 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2050 MHz
Number of transistors330 million7,200 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)66 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate6.900131.2
Floating-point processing powerno data4.198 TFLOPS
ROPs1232
TMUs1264
Tensor Coresno data128
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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 x8
Lengthno data222 mm
Width1-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1x 8-pin

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 MB6 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed690 MHz1937 MHz
Memory bandwidth44.16 GB/s186.0 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 HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 2.0
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

ATI X1950 PRO 0.29
Arc A380 16.21
+5490%

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 X1950 PRO 112
Arc A380 6233
+5465%

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 HD0−147

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.17

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 47
+0%
47
+0%
Elden Ring 45
+0%
45
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 37
+0%
37
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 94
+0%
94
+0%
Metro Exodus 63
+0%
63
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 31
+0%
31
+0%
Dota 2 33
+0%
33
+0%
Elden Ring 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 64
+0%
64
+0%
Fortnite 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80
+0%
80
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 33
+0%
33
+0%
Metro Exodus 44
+0%
44
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
World of Tanks 200−210
+0%
200−210
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 27
+0%
27
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 61
+0%
61
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Elden Ring 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
World of Tanks 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Elden Ring 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Fortnite 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 55 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.29 16.21
Recency 1 October 2006 14 June 2022
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 66 Watt 75 Watt

ATI X1950 PRO has 13.6% lower power consumption.

Arc A380, on the other hand, has a 5489.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A380 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1950 PRO in performance tests.


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 X1950 PRO
Radeon X1950 PRO
Intel Arc A380
Arc A380

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.


4.4 147 votes

Rate Radeon X1950 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 863 votes

Rate Arc A380 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.