GMA X3500 vs Riva 128

VS

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
Architectureno dataGeneration 4.0 (2006−2007)
GPU code nameNV3Bearlake
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date1 April 1997 (27 years ago)1 August 2007 (17 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.

Core clock speed100 MHz667 MHz
Number of transistors4 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology350 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)4 Watt13 Watt
Texture fill rate0.15.336
ROPs11
TMUs18

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).

InterfaceAGP 2xPCIe 1.0 x16
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeSDRSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount4 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed100 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth1.6 GB/sno 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 Connectors1x VGA, 1x DB13W3No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX5.09.0c
Shader Modelno data3.0
OpenGL1.02.0
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 April 1997 1 August 2007
Chip lithography 350 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 13 Watt

Riva 128 has 225% lower power consumption.

GMA X3500, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 years, and a 288.9% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Riva 128 and GMA X3500. We've got no test results to judge.


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.


NVIDIA Riva 128
Riva 128
Intel GMA X3500
GMA X3500

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.


3.7 38 votes

Rate Riva 128 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 11 votes

Rate GMA X3500 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.