Iris Xe Graphics MAX vs ATI Radeon X800 XL

Place in the ranking	1402	623
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	0.25	14.03
Architecture	R400 (2004−2008)	Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code name	R430	DG1
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	1 December 2004 (20 years ago)	31 October 2020 (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 cores	no data	768
Core clock speed	400 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	1650 MHz
Number of transistors	160 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	110 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	49 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	6.400	79.20
Floating-point processing power	no data	2.534 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	24
TMUs	16	48

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).

Interface	PCIe 1.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	1-slot	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no 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 type	GDDR3	LPDDR4X
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	4 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	490 MHz	4.3 GB/s
Memory bandwidth	31.36 GB/s	68.26 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 Connectors

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	9.0b (9_2)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	no data	6.4
OpenGL	2.0	4.6
OpenCL	N/A	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2

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 X800 XL 0.18

Iris Xe Graphics MAX 5.12
+2744%

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 X800 XL 69

Iris Xe Graphics MAX 1971
+2757%

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.18	5.12
Recency	1 December 2004	31 October 2020
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	4 GB
Chip lithography	110 nm	10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	49 Watt	25 Watt

Iris Xe Graphics MAX has a 2744.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 1000% more advanced lithography process, and 96% lower power consumption.

The Iris Xe Graphics MAX is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X800 XL in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.