GeForce 315M vs Radeon HD 2400
GeForce 315M
Popular choices:
Radeon HD 2400
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 GeForce 315M is positioned at rank 535 and the Radeon HD 2400 is on rank 323, so the Radeon HD 2400 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 315M
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 2400
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 315M is significantly newer (2015 vs 2009). The GeForce 315M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon HD 2400 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon HD 2400 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 5.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 315M.
| Insight | GeForce 315M | Radeon HD 2400 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-5.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+5.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2009 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon HD 2400 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
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 GeForce 315M and Radeon HD 2400
GeForce 315M
The GeForce 315M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 27 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 928 MHz to 1020 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 115 points.
Radeon HD 2400
The Radeon HD 2400 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 2 2009. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 850 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 121 points. Launch price was $249.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce 315M scores 115 versus the Radeon HD 2400's 121 — the Radeon HD 2400 leads by 5.2%. The GeForce 315M is built on Maxwell while the Radeon HD 2400 uses TeraScale, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 640 (GeForce 315M) vs 800 (Radeon HD 2400). Raw compute: 1.306 TFLOPS (GeForce 315M) vs 1.36 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 2400).
| Feature | GeForce 315M | Radeon HD 2400 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 115 | 121+5% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | TeraScale |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 640 | 800+25% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.306 TFLOPS | 1.36 TFLOPS+4% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40 | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 320 KB+100% | 160 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 315M | Radeon HD 2400 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GeForce 315M) vs 0.25 MB (Radeon HD 2400) — the GeForce 315M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 315M | Radeon HD 2400 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+700% | 0.25 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 315M draws 75W versus the Radeon HD 2400's 190W — a 86.8% difference. The GeForce 315M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 315M) vs 350W (Radeon HD 2400). Power connectors: Legacy vs 1x 6-pin.
| Feature | GeForce 315M | Radeon HD 2400 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W-61% | 190W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | 1x 6-pin |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 1.5+150% | 0.6 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 315M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2009).
| Feature | GeForce 315M | Radeon HD 2400 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $79 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $10 |
| Codename | GM107 | RV790 |
| Release | October 27 2015 | April 2 2009 |
| Ranking | #671 | #762 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 315M and Radeon HD 2400
