Radeon X1600 Pro vs Radeon HD 3000
Radeon X1600 Pro
Popular choices:
Radeon HD 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. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Radeon X1600 Pro is positioned at rank 342 and the Radeon HD 3000 is on rank 316, so the Radeon HD 3000 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon X1600 Pro
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 3000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon X1600 Pro is significantly newer (2020 vs 2011). The Radeon X1600 Pro 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 X1600 Pro is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.1% 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 X1600 Pro | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.1%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.1%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) (7nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| 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 X1600 Pro, it costs 80% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 375.2% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon X1600 Pro | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+375.2%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49) | ✅More affordable ($10) |
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 X1600 Pro and Radeon HD 3000
Radeon X1600 Pro
The Radeon X1600 Pro is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 21 2020. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1130 MHz to 1560 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 99 points.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon X1600 Pro scores 99 and the Radeon HD 3000 reaches 96 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon X1600 Pro is built on RDNA 1.0 while the Radeon HD 3000 uses TeraScale 3, both on 7 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 1,280 (Radeon HD 3000). Raw compute: 6.39 TFLOPS (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 1.92 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 3000).
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 99+3% | 96 |
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | TeraScale 3 |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 40 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+60% | 1280 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.39 TFLOPS+233% | 1.92 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 128+60% | 80 |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+500% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | Radeon HD 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: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 3 MB (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon HD 3000) — the Radeon X1600 Pro has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+500% | 0.5 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0c (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 10.0 (Radeon HD 3000). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0c | 10.0+11% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: None (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs UVD (Radeon HD 3000). Decoder: Avivo vs UVD.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | UVD |
| Decoder | Avivo | UVD |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 | — |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon X1600 Pro draws 150W versus the Radeon HD 3000's 186W — a 21.4% difference. The Radeon X1600 Pro is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 350W (Radeon HD 3000). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 168mm vs 1mm, occupying 1 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W-19% | 186W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | 168mm | 1mm |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.7+40% | 0.5 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon X1600 Pro launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the Radeon HD 3000 launched at $50 and now averages $10. The Radeon HD 3000 costs 79.6% less ($39 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 2.0 (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 9.6 (Radeon HD 3000) — the Radeon HD 3000 offers 380% better value. The Radeon X1600 Pro is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2011).
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | Radeon HD 3000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | $50-66% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | $10-80% |
| Performance per Dollar | 2.0 | 9.6+380% |
| Codename | Navi 10 | Cayman |
| Release | January 21 2020 | December 1 2011 |
| Ranking | #216 | #598 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon X1600 Pro and Radeon HD 3000
