CPU
GPU
GeForce Go 7400
Popular choices:
Radeon X1650 SE
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. The GeForce Go 7400 is positioned at rank #310 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce Go 7400
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon X1650 SE is significantly newer (2023 vs 2014). The Radeon X1650 SE likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce Go 7400 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon X1650 SE is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 7.6% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (512 MB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce Go 7400.
| Insight | GeForce Go 7400 | Radeon X1650 SE |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-7.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+7.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (7nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon X1650 SE 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 Go 7400 and Radeon X1650 SE
GeForce Go 7400
The GeForce Go 7400 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 29 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 993 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 64W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 66 points. Launch price was $89.
Radeon X1650 SE
The Radeon X1650 SE is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 17 2023. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 2581 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 71 points. Launch price was $549.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce Go 7400 scores 66 versus the Radeon X1650 SE's 71 — the Radeon X1650 SE leads by 7.6%. The GeForce Go 7400 is built on Kepler while the Radeon X1650 SE uses RDNA 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce Go 7400) vs 2,560 (Radeon X1650 SE).
| Feature | GeForce Go 7400 | Radeon X1650 SE |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 66 | 71+8% |
| Architecture | Kepler | RDNA 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 2560+567% |
| ROPs | 16 | 64+300% |
| TMUs | 32 | 160+400% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce Go 7400 | Radeon X1650 SE |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
The GeForce Go 7400 comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon X1650 SE has 512 MB. The Radeon X1650 SE offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce Go 7400 | Radeon X1650 SE |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 0.5 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0c (GeForce Go 7400) vs 9.0c (Radeon X1650 SE). OpenGL: 2.1 vs 2.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce Go 7400 | Radeon X1650 SE |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0c | 9.0c |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 2.1 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (GeForce Go 7400) vs Avivo (Radeon X1650 SE). Decoder: PureVideo vs Avivo. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264 (GeForce Go 7400) vs MPEG-2,WMV9 (Radeon X1650 SE).
| Feature | GeForce Go 7400 | Radeon X1650 SE |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | Avivo |
| Decoder | PureVideo | Avivo |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264 | MPEG-2,WMV9 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce Go 7400 draws 64W versus the Radeon X1650 SE's 250W — a 118.5% difference. The GeForce Go 7400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce Go 7400) vs 350W (Radeon X1650 SE). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce Go 7400 | Radeon X1650 SE |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 64W-74% | 250W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | — |
| Height | 0mm | — |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 1.0+233% | 0.3 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon X1650 SE is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce Go 7400 | Radeon X1650 SE |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $0 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $49 |
| Codename | GK107 | Navi 22 |
| Release | May 29 2014 | October 17 2023 |
| Ranking | #777 | #92 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce Go 7400 and Radeon X1650 SE
