GeForce2 MX/MX 400 vs Radeon IGP 340M
GeForce2 MX/MX 400
Popular choices:
Radeon IGP 340M
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 GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is positioned at rank 750 and the Radeon IGP 340M is on rank 414, so the Radeon IGP 340M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce2 MX/MX 400
Performance Per Dollar Radeon IGP 340M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 33.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon IGP 340M.
| Insight | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | Radeon IGP 340M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+33.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-33.3%) |
| Longevity | Turing (2018−2022) (12nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)) |
| 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 GeForce2 MX/MX 400 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 GeForce2 MX/MX 400 and Radeon IGP 340M
GeForce2 MX/MX 400
The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 1 2020. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1395 MHz to 1575 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4 points.
Radeon IGP 340M
The Radeon IGP 340M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in August 26 2018. It features the GCN 5.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 852 MHz to 1500 MHz. It has 3584 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 230W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce2 MX/MX 400 scores 4 versus the Radeon IGP 340M's 3 — the GeForce2 MX/MX 400 leads by 33.3%. The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is built on Turing while the Radeon IGP 340M uses GCN 5.0, both on 12 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce2 MX/MX 400) vs 3,584 (Radeon IGP 340M). Raw compute: 3.226 TFLOPS (GeForce2 MX/MX 400) vs 10.75 TFLOPS (Radeon IGP 340M). Boost clocks: 1575 MHz vs 1500 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | Radeon IGP 340M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4+33% | 3 |
| Architecture | Turing | GCN 5.0 |
| Process Node | 12 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 896 | 3584+300% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 3.226 TFLOPS | 10.75 TFLOPS+233% |
| Boost Clock | 1575 MHz+5% | 1500 MHz |
| ROPs | 32 | 64+100% |
| TMUs | 64 | 224+250% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | Radeon IGP 340M |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 64-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | Radeon IGP 340M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 draws 25W versus the Radeon IGP 340M's 230W — a 160.8% difference. The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce2 MX/MX 400) vs 350W (Radeon IGP 340M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | Radeon IGP 340M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 25W-89% | 230W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Height | 100mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 55°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 0.2 | 0.0 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce2 MX/MX 400 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2018).
| Feature | GeForce2 MX/MX 400 | Radeon IGP 340M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $129 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | — |
| Codename | N17S-G5 / GP107-670-A1 | Vega 10 |
| Release | August 1 2020 | August 26 2018 |
| Ranking | #523 | #593 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce2 MX/MX 400 and Radeon IGP 340M
