Radeon HD 3000 vs Radeon 3000
Radeon HD 3000
Popular choices:
Radeon 3000
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. The Radeon HD 3000 is positioned at rank #316 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 3000
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon 3000 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2011). The Radeon 3000 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon HD 3000 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon 3000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 3000.
| Insight | Radeon HD 3000 | Radeon 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.1%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) | GCN 4.0 (2016−2020) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon HD 3000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $10 versus $49 for the Radeon 3000, it costs 80% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 380% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon HD 3000 | Radeon 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+380%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($10) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon HD 3000 and Radeon 3000
Radeon HD 3000
The Radeon HD 3000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in December 1 2011. It features the TeraScale 3 architecture. The core clock speed is 750 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 186W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 96 points. Launch price was $180.
Radeon 3000
The Radeon 3000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 13 2019. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1082 MHz to 1218 MHz. It has 512 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 98 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 3000 scores 96 and the Radeon 3000 reaches 98 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 3000 is built on TeraScale 3 while the Radeon 3000 uses GCN 4.0, both on 40 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,280 (Radeon HD 3000) vs 512 (Radeon 3000). Raw compute: 1.92 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 3000) vs 1.247 TFLOPS (Radeon 3000).
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Radeon 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 96 | 98+2% |
| Architecture | TeraScale 3 | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280+150% | 512 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.92 TFLOPS+54% | 1.247 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32+100% | 16 |
| TMUs | 80+150% | 32 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+150% | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Radeon 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Radeon 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (Radeon HD 3000) vs 10_0 (Radeon 3000). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Radeon 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.0 | 10_0 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: UVD (Radeon HD 3000) vs Avivo HD (Radeon 3000). Decoder: UVD vs Avivo HD.
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Radeon 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | UVD | Avivo HD |
| Decoder | UVD | Avivo HD |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 3000 draws 186W versus the Radeon 3000's 50W — a 115.3% difference. The Radeon 3000 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 3000) vs 350W (Radeon 3000). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 1mm vs 1mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Radeon 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 186W | 50W-73% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | 1mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Perf/Watt | 0.5 | 2.0+300% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 3000 launched at $50 MSRP and currently averages $10, while the Radeon 3000 launched at $0 and now averages $49. The Radeon HD 3000 costs 79.6% less ($39 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 9.6 (Radeon HD 3000) vs 2.0 (Radeon 3000) — the Radeon HD 3000 offers 380% better value. The Radeon 3000 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2011).
| Feature | Radeon HD 3000 | Radeon 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $50 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-80% | $49 |
| Performance per Dollar | 9.6+380% | 2.0 |
| Codename | Cayman | Polaris 23 |
| Release | December 1 2011 | May 13 2019 |
| Ranking | #598 | #757 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 3000 and Radeon 3000
