AMD Radeon Vega 11 vs ATI Radeon X300
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon Vega 11 and ATI Radeon X300 videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, Memory, API support. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon Vega 11
- Videocard is newer: launch date 13 year(s) 5 month(s) later
- 38.1x more texture fill rate: 57.2 GTexel / s vs 1.5 GTexel / s
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 110 nm
- Around 3% lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 36 Watt
- 45.3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1857 vs 41
- 2.3x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 478 vs 209
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 February 2018 vs 1 September 2004 |
| Texture fill rate | 57.2 GTexel / s vs 1.5 GTexel / s |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 110 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt vs 36 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1857 vs 41 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 478 vs 209 |
Reasons to consider the ATI Radeon X300
- Around 25% higher core clock speed: 375 MHz vs 300 MHz
| Core clock speed | 375 MHz vs 300 MHz |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon Vega 11
GPU 2: ATI Radeon X300
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon Vega 11 | ATI Radeon X300 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1857 | 41 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 478 | 209 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 13318 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 41.582 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 371.843 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.156 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 52.449 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 248.838 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2156 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2475 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3343 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2156 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2475 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3343 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon Vega 11 | ATI Radeon X300 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 5.0 | Rage 9 |
| Code name | Owl | RV370 |
| Launch date | 13 February 2018 | 1 September 2004 |
| Place in performance rating | 886 | 884 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1300 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 375 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 1,830 gflops | |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 110 nm |
| Pipelines | 704 | |
| Texture fill rate | 57.2 GTexel / s | 1.5 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 36 Watt |
| Transistor count | 4,940 million | 107 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
Memory |
||
| Memory type | System Shared | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 64 MB | |
| Memory bandwidth | 6.4 GB / s | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
| Memory clock speed | 400 MHz | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 9.0 | |
| OpenGL | 2.0 | |
