UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) vs ATI Radeon Xpress 1100
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon Xpress 1100 with UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU), including specs and performance data.
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) outperforms ATI Xpress 1100 by a whopping 1388% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1479 | 1027 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 9.44 |
| Architecture | Rage 8 (2002−2007) | Gen. 11 (2021) |
| GPU code name | RC410 | Gen. 11 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 17 October 2007 (17 years ago) | 11 January 2021 (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 | 6 | 24 |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 300 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 130 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 4.8 - 10 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 0.6 | no data |
| ROPs | 2 | no data |
| TMUs | 2 | no data |
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 | no data |
| Width | IGP | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 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 | System Shared | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | no data |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | no data |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | no data |
| Shared memory | + | + |
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 | No outputs | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | no data | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 9.0 (9_0) | 12_1 |
| OpenGL | 2.0 | no data |
| OpenCL | N/A | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
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 HD | 0−1 | 8 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−41.7%
|
30−35
+41.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
−300%
|
4−5
+300%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 10−11
−80%
|
18
+80%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 8−9
−50%
|
12
+50%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−41.7%
|
30−35
+41.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Dota 2 | 8−9
−37.5%
|
11
+37.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−250%
|
7−8
+250%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 6−7
−50%
|
9−10
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−100%
|
6−7
+100%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−41.7%
|
30−35
+41.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−1100%
|
12−14
+1100%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 3−4 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 2−3 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
−600%
|
7−8
+600%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3
+0%
|
3
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) is 1100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) is ahead in 24 tests (57%)
- there's a draw in 18 tests (43%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.08 | 1.19 |
| Recency | 17 October 2007 | 11 January 2021 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 10 nm |
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) has a 1387.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
The UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon Xpress 1100 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon Xpress 1100 is a desktop card while UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) 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.
