ATI Radeon X800 GT AGP

Benchmark Performance

The ATI Radeon X800 GT AGP occupies a peculiar position in the hardware landscape: it is a 2007 release built on the R420 chip, which itself dates back to the Radeon R400 AGP generation. The benchmark data shows no synthetic scores for this card, and its average benchmark score is recorded as zero. That places it at the 50th percentile among all GPUs in the database, which is a statistical midpoint that must be read carefully — with no direct scores, this percentile likely reflects its historical context rather than any measurable contemporary performance.

The nearestRivals array is empty, which means the database has no direct comparison points for this specific AGP card. This is telling: the X800 GT AGP was a niche product at the end of its architectural life, and its performance cannot be quantified against peers in the current dataset. What the data does provide is a pixel rate of 3.784 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 3.784 GTexel/s, both figures that indicate a balanced design where pixel and texel throughput are identical. That symmetry — 8 TMUs and 8 ROPs working in lockstep — suggests the card was designed for straightforward rasterization without any specialized compute workloads.

The 130 nm process node from TSMC, with 160 million transistors on a 281 mm² die, yields a transistor density of 569.4K per mm². For context, this is a relatively low density by modern standards, but for its era it represented a mature, well-understood manufacturing process. The data shows no base or boost clock figures, and no FP32 or FP16 throughput numbers, which means any discussion of raw compute performance is impossible from the fact pack. What can be said is that the R420 chip was the predecessor to the R500 AGP series, and it succeeded the R300 — placing it in a clear generational lineage where each step brought architectural refinements.

In the absence of rival scores, the practical interpretation is straightforward: this card's performance is what its clock speeds and memory bandwidth dictate, nothing more. The 50th percentile ranking is a neutral placement, not a recommendation. For anyone considering this card today, the data suggests it is a collector's item or a legacy system component rather than a competitive gaming solution.

Ray Tracing and Feature Set

The X800 GT AGP has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. The fact pack lists these fields as null, which is consistent with its DirectX 9.0b (9_2) API support. This is a pre-DXR, pre-Vulkan architecture — the Vulkan API field is also null. What the card does support is OpenGL 2.1, which was the standard for its generation.

The API support tells a clear story: this card was built for the DirectX 9 era, specifically the 9_2 feature level. That means it predates Shader Model 3.0 (which came with DirectX 9_3) and has no access to hardware-accelerated ray tracing in any form. The 8 TMUs and 8 ROPs handle traditional rasterization tasks, and the 3.784 GPixel/s pixel rate is the ceiling for fill-rate-bound workloads.

For feature set expectations, the data is unambiguous: no hardware acceleration for modern graphics APIs, no compute shaders in the modern sense, and no vendor-specific ray tracing extensions. The display outputs — 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video — confirm this is a card from the analog-to-digital transition era. S-Video output is particularly dated, as it was designed for standard-definition televisions. The AGP 8x bus interface is another legacy indicator; this card cannot be installed in PCIe systems without an adapter, and even then, bandwidth would be limited.

The practical takeaway: if ray tracing or modern API features are a requirement, this card fails immediately. Its feature set is frozen in 2004-era DirectX 9.0b, and no driver update can change that. The OpenGL 2.1 support is equally dated, meaning modern OpenGL applications that require 4.x features will not run.

Power and Cooling

The X800 GT AGP has a thermal design power of 40 W. That is a remarkably low figure for a desktop graphics card, and it has direct implications for system integration. The suggested PSU is 200 W, which is modest by any standard — most modern systems use far more, but for a legacy AGP system from the mid-2000s, a 200 W power supply was common.

The card requires a single Molex power connector. This is an older power standard, not the 6-pin or 8-pin PCIe connectors used today. Any system using this card must have a Molex cable available from the power supply. The single-slot cooler design is consistent with the low 40 W TDP — there is simply not much heat to dissipate. The data shows no length, height, or width dimensions, so physical fitment must be assessed qualitatively, but a single-slot, 40 W card is unlikely to obstruct adjacent slots in most AGP motherboards.

The cooling requirements are modest enough that even a basic heatsink with a small fan should suffice. The 40 W TDP means no exotic cooling solutions are needed. The 200 W PSU recommendation includes headroom for the rest of the system, but it is importantly this figure is the suggested PSU, not a minimum. A system with a power-hungry CPU might need more, but the data does not specify that.

The connector situation is a practical concern: Molex connectors are increasingly rare on modern power supplies, so anyone building a legacy system with this card may need an adapter. The single-slot form factor is a benefit for compatibility, as it does not occupy additional expansion slots.

Who Should Consider It

The benchmark scores for this card are zero, and the nearestRivals list is empty, so any recommendation must be grounded in the architectural data rather than comparative performance. The 256 MB GDDR3 memory and 31.55 GB/s bandwidth are the defining specifications. These figures point to a card that was designed for 1024x768 or 1280x1024 resolutions in its era, with medium detail settings.

The 50th percentile ranking suggests this card sits in the middle of the historical GPU distribution, but that is a statistical artifact of the database having no direct scores for it. Realistically, the X800 GT AGP is a candidate for three types of users: retro gaming enthusiasts building a period-correct system from the mid-2000s, collectors preserving AGP-era hardware, and users who need a basic display output for a legacy AGP motherboard that lacks integrated graphics.

For any modern gaming workload, this card is unsuitable. The DirectX 9.0b (9_2) API support means it cannot run DirectX 10, 11, or 12 titles. The 256 MB VRAM is a hard limitation even for many late-2000s games. The 3.784 GPixel/s fill rate and 3.784 GTexel/s texture rate are adequate for early DirectX 9 titles at low resolutions, but they will bottleneck at higher settings.

The data also shows this card is end-of-life in production status and was released on November 7, 2007 — approximately three years after the R420 chip's original debut. That makes it a late-stage budget refresh of an aging architecture. The successor is the Radeon R500 AGP, which would be a more capable choice for anyone seeking AGP performance, but that card is not covered in this fact pack.

Memory Subsystem

The memory configuration is straightforward: 256 MB of GDDR3 on a 256-bit bus, running at 493 MHz with 986 Mbps effective speed. This yields a bandwidth of 31.55 GB/s. The 256-bit bus width is significant — it was a high-end feature in the R400 generation, and it compensates somewhat for the modest memory clock.

The 31.55 GB/s bandwidth is the key number here. For its era, this was respectable for a mid-range card, but it pales next to even entry-level modern GPUs, which routinely exceed 100 GB/s. The 256 MB capacity is the more severe limitation: at 1280x1024 with high-detail textures, many games of the mid-2000s would exceed this capacity, forcing texture thrashing and stuttering.

The GDDR3 memory type was appropriate for the time, offering lower power consumption than DDR2 at similar clock speeds. The 256-bit bus width means the memory controller can move 32 bytes per clock cycle, which is efficient for the memory clock available. However, the 986 Mbps effective speed is low — later GDDR3 implementations would double or triple this figure.

For high-resolution gaming, the data indicates this card is not viable. The 256 MB capacity is the binding constraint, not the bandwidth. Even with the wide 256-bit bus, the sheer volume of data needed at 1600x1200 or higher resolutions would exceed what the memory subsystem can hold. The 3.784 GPixel/s pixel rate compounds this: even if textures fit in VRAM, the fill rate would limit frame rates at higher resolutions.

The practical interpretation: this memory subsystem was designed for 1024x768 or 1280x1024 gaming with moderate texture quality. It is not a high-resolution card, and the data supports that conclusion through capacity limits rather than bandwidth shortfalls.

FAQ

Q: What DirectX version does the ATI Radeon X800 GT AGP support?

A: The card supports DirectX 9.0b (9_2) and OpenGL 2.1. It does not support Vulkan, and it has no ray tracing or tensor cores.

Q: What is the power consumption and PSU requirement?

A: The TDP is 40 W, and the suggested PSU is 200 W. The card requires a single Molex power connector and uses a single-slot cooler.

Q: How much memory does the card have and what type is it?

A: It has 256 MB of GDDR3 memory on a 256-bit bus, running at 493 MHz with 986 Mbps effective speed, providing 31.55 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: What is the manufacturing process and chip configuration?

A: The card uses the R420 chip on a 130 nm process from TSMC, with 160 million transistors on a 281 mm² die. It has 8 TMUs and 8 ROPs.

Q: What display outputs are available?

A: The card has 1x DVI, 1x VGA, and 1x S-Video outputs. It uses an AGP 8x bus interface.

Q: Is this card suitable for modern gaming?

A: No. The DirectX 9.0b (9_2) support and 256 MB VRAM limit it to early DirectX 9 titles at low resolutions. The production status is end-of-life, and the card was released in November 2007.