Mobility Radeon X1600 vs GeForce 9400M G
Mobility Radeon X1600
Popular choices:
GeForce 9400M G
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 Mobility Radeon X1600 is positioned at rank 650 and the GeForce 9400M G is on rank 650, so the GeForce 9400M G offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Mobility Radeon X1600
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9400M G
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 9400M G is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Mobility Radeon X1600.
| Insight | Mobility Radeon X1600 | GeForce 9400M G |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 9400M G offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 9400M G holds the technical lead. Priced at $10 (vs $15), it costs 33% less, resulting in a 53.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Mobility Radeon X1600 | GeForce 9400M G |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+53.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($15) | ✅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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Mobility Radeon X1600 and GeForce 9400M G
Mobility Radeon X1600
The Mobility Radeon X1600 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 7 2010. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 700 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 92 points.
GeForce 9400M G
The GeForce 9400M G is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1072 MHz to 1176 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 94 points.
Graphics Performance
The Mobility Radeon X1600 scores 92 and the GeForce 9400M G reaches 94 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Mobility Radeon X1600 is built on TeraScale 2 while the GeForce 9400M G uses Maxwell, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (Mobility Radeon X1600) vs 384 (GeForce 9400M G). Raw compute: 1.12 TFLOPS (Mobility Radeon X1600) vs 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce 9400M G).
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X1600 | GeForce 9400M G |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 92 | 94+2% |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+108% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.12 TFLOPS+24% | 0.9032 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 40+67% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | 192 KB+140% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X1600 | GeForce 9400M G |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 256 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Mobility Radeon X1600) vs 1 MB (GeForce 9400M G) — the GeForce 9400M G has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X1600 | GeForce 9400M G |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0c (Mobility Radeon X1600) vs 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce 9400M G). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 2.
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X1600 | GeForce 9400M G |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0c | 11.1 (10_0)+23% |
| Max Displays | 0 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Avivo (Mobility Radeon X1600) vs None (GeForce 9400M G). Decoder: Avivo vs PureVideo HD (VP3).
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X1600 | GeForce 9400M G |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Avivo | None |
| Decoder | Avivo | PureVideo HD (VP3) |
| Codecs | — | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Mobility Radeon X1600 draws 50W versus the GeForce 9400M G's 33W — a 41% difference. The GeForce 9400M G is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Mobility Radeon X1600) vs 350W (GeForce 9400M G). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Card length: 1mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X1600 | GeForce 9400M G |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 33W-34% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 1mm | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 1.8 | 2.8+56% |
Value Analysis
The Mobility Radeon X1600 launched at $49 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GeForce 9400M G launched at $50 and now averages $10. The GeForce 9400M G costs 33.3% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.1 (Mobility Radeon X1600) vs 9.4 (GeForce 9400M G) — the GeForce 9400M G offers 54.1% better value. The GeForce 9400M G is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2010).
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X1600 | GeForce 9400M G |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $49-2% | $50 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | $10-33% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.1 | 9.4+54% |
| Codename | Broadway | GM108 |
| Release | January 7 2010 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #846 | #847 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Mobility Radeon X1600 and GeForce 9400M G
