ATI Radeon X300 LE

The ATI Radeon X300 LE is an entry-level graphics card from the R300 generation, built around the RV370 chip on a 110 nm process at TSMC. It packs 107 million transistors on a 74 mm² die, with a transistor density of 1.4M per mm², and was released on August 31, 2004. The card is now end-of-life, uses a PCIe 1.0 x16 interface, and is a single-slot design with a suggested power supply of 200 W. Its display outputs are 1x DVI, 1x VGA, and 1x S-Video.

Benchmark Performance

The benchmark data for the ATI Radeon X300 LE is sparse, with no synthetic scores or frame-rate results recorded in the database. The average benchmark score is listed as 0, and the percentile versus all GPUs is 50, placing it exactly at the median of the historical GPU distribution. This percentile is notable because it suggests that, despite its low-end positioning, the card sits in the middle of the pack when considering all GPUs ever cataloged — though this is likely due to the inclusion of many older and less capable parts in the database.

Without direct rival scores or delta percentages, performance analysis must rely on the card’s internal specifications. The X300 LE has 4 texture mapping units (TMUs) and 4 render output units (ROPs). Its pixel fillrate is 1.300 GPixel/s, and its texture fillrate is 1.300 GTexel/s. These figures indicate a very modest throughput, typical of a budget part from its era. The lack of a base or boost clock for the GPU means that the fillrates are the primary quantitative measure of its shading capacity. The memory clock is set at 200 MHz, with an effective data rate of 400 Mbps, which is extremely low by modern standards but was common for entry-level DDR memory in 2004.

The data shows that the X300 LE is not a performance-oriented card. The 50th percentile rank is misleading if interpreted as "average performance" — rather, it reflects that the database contains a large number of similarly low-powered legacy GPUs. In practice, the fillrates of 1.300 GPixel/s and 1.300 GTexel/s place it far below any contemporary discrete GPU, and even below many integrated solutions from later generations. The absence of any recorded benchmark scores means that relative performance against specific rivals cannot be quantified with deltas; the card’s capabilities must be inferred from its raw pixel and texture processing rates.

Who Should Consider It

Given the specifications, the ATI Radeon X300 LE is suited only for very old or lightweight workloads. The 64 MB of DDR memory on a 128-bit bus yields a bandwidth of 6.400 GB/s, which is sufficient for desktop use, 2D applications, and early 3D titles from the pre-2004 era. At resolutions like 1024x768 or lower, the card could handle basic games with reduced detail settings, but the 1.300 GPixel/s fillrate will struggle with any scene containing multiple light sources or high polygon counts.

For users running legacy operating systems or software that requires DirectX 9.0 support, this card provides a baseline feature set. However, the 64 MB VRAM is a severe limitation for texture-heavy applications; many games from the mid-2000s already required 128 MB or more. The X300 LE is not recommended for any modern gaming, even at the lowest settings, because its pixel and texture rates are an order of magnitude below what contemporary titles demand. It is best viewed as a display adapter for office tasks, retro gaming at low resolutions, or as a spare part for testing PCIe slots.

Ray Tracing and Feature Set

The ATI Radeon X300 LE has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores — these features did not exist in the R300 architecture. The card supports DirectX 9.0 and OpenGL 2.0, which were standard APIs for its time. DirectX 9.0 introduced programmable shaders (Shader Model 2.0), and the X300 LE nominally supports those, but with only 4 TMUs and 4 ROPs, the actual shader throughput is minimal. The lack of Vulkan support is expected, as that API was released over a decade later.

The feature set is purely functional: it provides the basic 3D acceleration needed for early-2000s games and multimedia. There is no hardware-accelerated ray tracing, no variable rate shading, and no mesh shaders. The card’s 110 nm process and 107 million transistors are indicative of a design focused on cost and power efficiency rather than advanced rendering. For any modern feature set — such as DLSS, FSR, or hardware-accelerated DXR — the X300 LE has zero capability. Its only relevance in this context is as a historical artifact showing how far GPU technology has progressed.

How It Compares

The nearestRivals field in the database is empty, meaning there are no direct comparison points with exact scores or delta percentages. This absence of rival data is itself informative: the X300 LE is so far removed from the performance envelope of most other GPUs that the database does not list a meaningful peer. However, based on its architecture and specifications, it can be placed relative to other R300-generation parts.

Within the R300 family, the X300 LE is a low-end variant. The R300 architecture was used across a range of cards, from entry-level to high-end, but the X300 LE’s 64 MB memory and 128-bit bus are among the smallest configurations. Compared to a hypothetical mid-range R300 card with more TMUs and higher clocks, the X300 LE would be significantly slower — likely 30-50% behind in fillrate, though no such numbers are provided in the fact pack. Against its predecessor, the Radeon R200 series, the X300 LE offers a newer feature set (DirectX 9.0 vs. older APIs) but not necessarily higher raw throughput.

The successor to the X300 LE is the Radeon R400 AGP, which would have improved memory bandwidth and possibly more shader units, but again, no specific scores are available. The X300 LE’s 50th percentile rank, when set against the entire GPU database, suggests it is neither at the very bottom nor anywhere near the top — it sits in a large middle cluster of legacy cards that are all functionally obsolete for modern workloads. Without rival deltas, the comparison must remain qualitative: the X300 LE is a basic entry-level card that was outclassed by even the mainstream parts of its own generation.

Memory Subsystem

The memory configuration is one of the few areas where the X300 LE has identifiable numbers. It comes with 64 MB of DDR memory, which is exactly half of what was becoming standard in 2004 for mid-range cards. The 128-bit bus width is respectable for that era, but the memory clock of 200 MHz (400 Mbps effective) is very low. The resulting bandwidth is 6.400 GB/s, a figure that is roughly one-tenth of what a high-end card from the same year would offer.

This bandwidth is sufficient for 2D framebuffer operations and low-resolution 3D rendering, but it becomes a bottleneck at higher resolutions. For example, at 1600x1200 with 32-bit color, the framebuffer alone consumes a significant portion of the available bandwidth, leaving little for texture reads and shader operations. The 64 MB capacity also limits the size of textures and the number of rendering targets. Games that use large, high-resolution textures will experience severe stuttering or fail to load assets entirely.

The 6.400 GB/s bandwidth, combined with the 1.300 GPixel/s fillrate, means that the card is balanced for its intended use — low-detail 3D at low resolutions. The 128-bit bus is a positive, as it allows the card to use cheaper DDR memory while still providing more bandwidth than a 64-bit bus would. However, the low effective memory speed negates much of that advantage. For high-resolution gaming (above 1024x768), the memory subsystem is the primary limiting factor, as the GPU cannot fetch data fast enough to maintain smooth frame rates. In summary, the memory is adequate for the card’s entry-level purpose but is far from capable of handling any modern or even late-2000s workload.