GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon HD 2400 XT

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.

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

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 2400 XT

#1

GeForce RTX 3060 Ti

MSRP: $399|Avg: $280

4804%

#2

GeForce RTX 5060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

4615%

#3

Radeon RX 5600 XT

MSRP: $279|Avg: $180

4562%

#4

Radeon RX 9060

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

4554%

#5

GeForce RTX 5050

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

4544%

#6

GeForce RTX 3050 OEM

MSRP: $249|Avg: $150

4519%

#7

Arc A580

MSRP: $179|Avg: $179

4462%

#8

Radeon RX 9060 XT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

4445%

#9

Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

4404%

#10

Radeon RX 7600

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

4392%

#11

Radeon RX 6600

MSRP: $329|Avg: $180

4339%

#12

GeForce RTX 4060

MSRP: $299|Avg: $299

4330%

#13

Arc B570

MSRP: $219|Avg: $219

4252%

#14

Arc B580

MSRP: $249|Avg: $249

4249%

#309

Radeon R5 430 OEM

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13

5298%

#324

Radeon HD 2400 XT

MSRP: $79|Avg: $10

100%

#326

GeForce 7300 GT

MSRP: $89|Avg: $20

92%

#327

Radeon HD 3870 X2

MSRP: $449|Avg: $40

87%

#329

GeForce 7950 GT

MSRP: $299|Avg: $50

77%

#330

RADEON X550XT

MSRP: $50|Avg: $40

74%

#335

Radeon X1650 Pro

MSRP: $100|Avg: $15

56%

#336

RADEON X550

MSRP: $60|Avg: $10

56%

#337

Radeon HD 8350

MSRP: $200|Avg: $39

54%

#339

Radeon X1950 GT

MSRP: $140|Avg: $49

50%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 is significantly newer (2019 vs 2012). The GeForce GTX 1650 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon HD 2400 XT lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 6512.6% higher G3D Mark score and 1500% more VRAM (4 GB vs 256 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 2400 XT.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon HD 2400 XT
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+6512.6%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-6512.6%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+1500%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $10), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 781.7% better value per dollar than the Radeon HD 2400 XT.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon HD 2400 XT
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+781.7%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)	✅More affordable ($10)

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 GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

Radeon HD 2400 XT Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and Radeon HD 2400 XT

GeForce GTX 1650

The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.

Radeon HD 2400 XT

The Radeon HD 2400 XT is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 19 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 925 MHz to 975 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 185W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 119 points. Launch price was $270.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon HD 2400 XT's 119 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 6512.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon HD 2400 XT uses GCN 1.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 1,536 (Radeon HD 2400 XT). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2.995 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 2400 XT). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 975 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon HD 2400 XT
G3D Mark Score	7,869+6513%	119
Architecture	Turing	GCN 1.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	1536+71%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	2.995 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+71%	975 MHz
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	56	96+71%
L1 Cache	896 KB+133%	384 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon HD 2400 XT
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon HD 2400 XT has 256 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1500% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon HD 2400 XT) — the GeForce GTX 1650 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon HD 2400 XT
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+1500%	0.25 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	0.5 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon HD 2400 XT's 185W — a 84.6% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (Radeon HD 2400 XT). Power connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon HD 2400 XT
TDP	75W-59%	185W
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	1x 6-pin
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	—
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+17383%	0.6

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the Radeon HD 2400 XT launched at $79 and now averages $10. The Radeon HD 2400 XT costs 86.7% less ($65 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 11.9 (Radeon HD 2400 XT) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 781.5% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2012).