GeForce FX Go5700 vs RADEON E2400
GeForce FX Go5700
Popular choices:
RADEON E2400
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 FX Go5700 is positioned at rank 296 and the RADEON E2400 is on rank 351, so the GeForce FX Go5700 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce FX Go5700
Performance Per Dollar RADEON E2400
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The RADEON E2400 is significantly newer (2017 vs 2010). The RADEON E2400 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce FX Go5700 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RADEON E2400 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce FX Go5700.
| Insight | GeForce FX Go5700 | RADEON E2400 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the RADEON E2400 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 FX Go5700 and RADEON E2400
GeForce FX Go5700
The GeForce FX Go5700 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in December 7 2010. It features the Rankine architecture. The core clock speed is 732 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 219W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 51 points. Launch price was $349.
RADEON E2400
The RADEON E2400 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 20 2017. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1183 MHz to 1124 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 52 points. Launch price was $79.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce FX Go5700 scores 51 and the RADEON E2400 reaches 52 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce FX Go5700 is built on Rankine while the RADEON E2400 uses GCN 4.0, both on 40 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 480 (GeForce FX Go5700) vs 384 (RADEON E2400). Raw compute: 1.405 TFLOPS (GeForce FX Go5700) vs 0.9085 TFLOPS (RADEON E2400).
| Feature | GeForce FX Go5700 | RADEON E2400 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 51 | 52+2% |
| Architecture | Rankine | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 480+25% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.405 TFLOPS+55% | 0.9085 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 40+150% | 16 |
| TMUs | 60+150% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 960 KB+900% | 96 KB |
| L2 Cache | 640 KB+25% | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce FX Go5700 | RADEON E2400 |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 640 KB (GeForce FX Go5700) vs 512 KB (RADEON E2400) — the GeForce FX Go5700 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce FX Go5700 | RADEON E2400 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 640 KB+25% | 512 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce FX Go5700 draws 219W versus the RADEON E2400's 50W — a 125.7% difference. The RADEON E2400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce FX Go5700) vs 350W (RADEON E2400). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy.
| Feature | GeForce FX Go5700 | RADEON E2400 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 219W | 50W-77% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.2 | 1.0+400% |
Value Analysis
The RADEON E2400 is the newer GPU (2017 vs 2010).
| Feature | GeForce FX Go5700 | RADEON E2400 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $100 |
| Codename | GF110 | Lexa |
| Release | December 7 2010 | April 20 2017 |
| Ranking | #497 | #773 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce FX Go5700 and RADEON E2400
