RADEON E2400 vs GeForce G 103M
RADEON E2400
Popular choices:
GeForce G 103M
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 RADEON E2400 is positioned at rank 351 and the GeForce G 103M is on rank 252, so the GeForce G 103M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar RADEON E2400
Performance Per Dollar GeForce G 103M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce G 103M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 21.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the RADEON E2400.
| Insight | RADEON E2400 | GeForce G 103M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-21.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+21.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / Pascal (2016−2021)) |
| 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 GeForce G 103M 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 RADEON E2400 and GeForce G 103M
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.
GeForce G 103M
The GeForce G 103M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 17 2017. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1228 MHz to 1468 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 63 points. Launch price was $79.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the RADEON E2400 scores 52 versus the GeForce G 103M's 63 — the GeForce G 103M leads by 21.2%. The RADEON E2400 is built on GCN 4.0 while the GeForce G 103M uses Pascal, both on a 14 nm process. Shader units: 384 (RADEON E2400) vs 384 (GeForce G 103M). Raw compute: 0.9085 TFLOPS (RADEON E2400) vs 1.127 TFLOPS (GeForce G 103M). Boost clocks: 1124 MHz vs 1468 MHz.
| Feature | RADEON E2400 | GeForce G 103M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 52 | 63+21% |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.9085 TFLOPS | 1.127 TFLOPS+24% |
| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz | 1468 MHz+31% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 24 | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 96 KB | 144 KB+50% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RADEON E2400 | GeForce G 103M |
|---|---|---|
| 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 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | RADEON E2400 | GeForce G 103M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 512 KB | 512 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The RADEON E2400 draws 50W versus the GeForce G 103M's 30W — a 50% difference. The GeForce G 103M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (RADEON E2400) vs 350W (GeForce G 103M). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy.
| Feature | RADEON E2400 | GeForce G 103M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 30W-40% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 1.0 | 2.1+110% |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on RADEON E2400 and GeForce G 103M
