
Radeon Xpress 1300 vs RADEON 9800

Radeon Xpress 1300
Popular choices:

RADEON 9800
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar RADEON 9800
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RADEON 9800 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 11.5% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon Xpress 1300 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Radeon Xpress 1300 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-11.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+11.5%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) (7nm) | RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) (4nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon Xpress 1300 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $49 versus $399 for the RADEON 9800, it costs 88% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 630% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon Xpress 1300 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+630%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($49) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($399) |
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 Xpress 1300 and RADEON 9800

Radeon Xpress 1300
The Radeon Xpress 1300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 4 2020. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1000 MHz to 1650 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 85W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 52 points.

RADEON 9800
The RADEON 9800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 58 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Radeon Xpress 1300 scores 52 versus the RADEON 9800's 58 — the RADEON 9800 leads by 11.5%. The Radeon Xpress 1300 is built on RDNA 1.0 while the RADEON 9800 uses RDNA 3.5, both on 7 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 1,280 (Radeon Xpress 1300) vs 2,560 (RADEON 9800). Raw compute: 4.224 TFLOPS (Radeon Xpress 1300) vs 14.85 TFLOPS (RADEON 9800). Boost clocks: 1650 MHz vs 2900 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon Xpress 1300 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 52 | 58+12% |
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | RDNA 3.5 |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 4 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280 | 2560+100% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.224 TFLOPS | 14.85 TFLOPS+252% |
| Boost Clock | 1650 MHz | 2900 MHz+76% |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 80 | 160+100% |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 8 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon Xpress 1300 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The Radeon Xpress 1300 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the RADEON 9800 has 128 MB. The Radeon Xpress 1300 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (Radeon Xpress 1300) vs 8 MB (RADEON 9800) — the RADEON 9800 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon Xpress 1300 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+300% | 0.125 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 8 MB+300% |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon Xpress 1300 draws 85W versus the RADEON 9800's 55W — a 42.9% difference. The RADEON 9800 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon Xpress 1300) vs 350W (RADEON 9800). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.
| Feature | Radeon Xpress 1300 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 85W | 55W-35% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.6 | 1.1+83% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon Xpress 1300 launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the RADEON 9800 launched at $399 and now averages $399. The Radeon Xpress 1300 costs 87.7% less ($350 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 1.1 (Radeon Xpress 1300) vs 0.1 (RADEON 9800) — the Radeon Xpress 1300 offers 1000% better value. The RADEON 9800 is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2020).
| Feature | Radeon Xpress 1300 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $0-100% | $399 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49-88% | $399 |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.1+1000% | 0.1 |
| Codename | Navi 14 | Strix Halo |
| Release | August 4 2020 | January 6 2025 |
| Ranking | #351 | #98 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















