Quadro4 900 XGL vs ATI Radeon Xpress 1150

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureRage 9 (2003−2006)Kelvin (2001−2003)
GPU code nameRS485NV25 A2
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date23 May 2006 (18 years ago)19 February 2002 (22 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 cores6no data
Core clock speed400 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speed400 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data63 million
Manufacturing process technology110 nm150 nm
Texture fill rate0.82.400
ROPs28
TMUs28

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 x16AGP 4x
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeSystem SharedDDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared128 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared325 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data10.4 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

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 ConnectorsNo outputs2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.08.1
OpenGL2.01.3
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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 Xpress 1150 29
+625%
Quadro4 900 XGL 4

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 May 2006 19 February 2002
Chip lithography 110 nm 150 nm

ATI Xpress 1150 has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 36.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Xpress 1150 and Quadro4 900 XGL. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Xpress 1150 is a desktop card while Quadro4 900 XGL is a workstation one.


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 Xpress 1150
Radeon Xpress 1150
NVIDIA Quadro4 900 XGL
Quadro4 900 XGL

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.5 60 votes

Rate Radeon Xpress 1150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Quadro4 900 XGL 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.