GeForce 6150SE vs GeForce Go 6400

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 6150SE is positioned at rank 707 and the GeForce Go 6400 is on rank 338, so the GeForce Go 6400 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 6150SE

#697

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

13081%

#699

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

11858%

#700

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

11827%

#704

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

10754%

#705

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

10681%

#707

GeForce 6150SE

MSRP: $30|Avg: $5

100%

#708

Mobility Radeon X1300

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

99%

#709

Mobility Radeon X1350

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

99%

#710

MOBILITY RADEON 9600/9700

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

96%

#711

GeForce 7900 GTX

MSRP: $499|Avg: $40

94%

#712

GeForce 6800 GS

MSRP: $249|Avg: $40

93%

#713

MOBILITY RADEON 9600

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

88%

#714

GeForce 6150

MSRP: $30|Avg: $10

88%

#715

RADEON E4690

MSRP: $558|Avg: $558

88%

#716

MOBILITY RADEON X300

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

82%

#717

MOBILITY RADEON X700

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

81%

#718

Mobility Radeon HD 4225

MSRP: $100|Avg: $15

80%

#719

RADEON X800 SE

MSRP: $200|Avg: $15

78%

#720

MOBILITY RADEON 9700

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

66%

#721

Mobility Radeon HD 2300

MSRP: $100|Avg: $15

61%

#722

GeForce 7800 GTX

MSRP: $599|Avg: $40

54%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce Go 6400

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

9068%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

8711%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

8610%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

8595%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

8578%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

8529%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

8421%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

8390%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

8313%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

8290%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

8190%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

8172%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

8025%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

8020%

#323

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

10000%

#338

GeForce Go 6400

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#339

Radeon X1950 GT

MSRP: $140|Avg: $49

95%

#340

GeForce 6600 GT

MSRP: $199|Avg: $50

90%

#341

RADEON X600 PRO

MSRP: $99|Avg: $10

85%

#342

Radeon X1600 Pro

MSRP: $149|Avg: $49

83%

#343

RADEON X300SE

MSRP: $60|Avg: $60

79%

#345

RADEON X800 GTO

MSRP: $199|Avg: $199

72%

#346

Radeon X1600 XT

MSRP: $199|Avg: $15

72%

#347

Radeon X1300

MSRP: $100|Avg: $49

72%

#348

Radeon X1800 GTO

MSRP: $249|Avg: $20

71%

#349

GeForce 7800 GT

MSRP: $449|Avg: $20

68%

#351

RADEON E2400

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

65%

#352

Radeon X1650 GTO

MSRP: $150|Avg: $20

63%

#353

RADEON X800GT

MSRP: $160|Avg: $10

63%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce 6150SE is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4.2% higher G3D Mark score and 3025% more VRAM (512 MB vs 16 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce Go 6400.

Insight	GeForce 6150SE	GeForce Go 6400
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+4.2%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-4.2%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+3025%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce 6150SE 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.

GeForce 6150SE Benchmark Check

GeForce Go 6400 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 6150SE and GeForce Go 6400

GeForce 6150SE

The GeForce 6150SE is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 937 MHz to 1038 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 10W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 25 points.

GeForce Go 6400

The GeForce Go 6400 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 5 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 902 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 65W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 24 points. Launch price was $99.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce 6150SE scores 25 and the GeForce Go 6400 reaches 24 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 6150SE is built on Pascal while the GeForce Go 6400 uses Kepler, both on 14 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 6150SE) vs 384 (GeForce Go 6400). Raw compute: 0.7972 TFLOPS (GeForce 6150SE) vs 0.6927 TFLOPS (GeForce Go 6400).

Feature	GeForce 6150SE	GeForce Go 6400
G3D Mark Score	25+4%	24
Architecture	Pascal	Kepler
Process Node	14 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	384	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.7972 TFLOPS+15%	0.6927 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	24	32+33%
L1 Cache	144 KB+350%	32 KB
L2 Cache	512 KB+100%	256 KB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce 6150SE	GeForce Go 6400
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce 6150SE comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce Go 6400 has 16 MB. The GeForce 6150SE offers 3025% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce 6150SE) vs 256 KB (GeForce Go 6400) — the GeForce 6150SE has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce 6150SE	GeForce Go 6400
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB+3025%	0.016 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	512 KB+100%	256 KB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 9.0c (GeForce 6150SE) vs 10.0 (GeForce Go 6400). Vulkan: None vs None. OpenGL: 2.1 vs 2.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 1 vs 1.

Feature	GeForce 6150SE	GeForce Go 6400
DirectX	9.0c	10.0+11%
Vulkan	None	None
OpenGL	2.1	2.1
Max Displays	1	1

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: No (GeForce 6150SE) vs No (GeForce Go 6400). Decoder: PureVideo vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2 (GeForce 6150SE) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (GeForce Go 6400).

Feature	GeForce 6150SE	GeForce Go 6400
Encoder	No	No
Decoder	PureVideo	PureVideo HD VP2
Codecs	MPEG-2	MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce 6150SE draws 10W versus the GeForce Go 6400's 65W — a 146.7% difference. The GeForce 6150SE is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 6150SE) vs 350W (GeForce Go 6400). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 75°C.