RADEON E2400 vs RADEON 9800
RADEON E2400
Popular choices:
RADEON 9800
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 RADEON 9800 is on rank 740, so the RADEON E2400 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 RADEON 9800
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The RADEON 9800 is significantly newer (2025 vs 2017). The RADEON 9800 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The RADEON E2400 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RADEON 9800 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 11.5% higher G3D Mark score. However, the RADEON E2400 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | RADEON E2400 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-11.5%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+11.5%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2017 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) | RDNA 3.5 (2024−2025) (4nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+300%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The RADEON E2400 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $100 versus $399 for the RADEON 9800, it costs 75% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 257.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | RADEON E2400 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+257.7%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($100) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($399) |
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 RADEON 9800
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.
RADEON 9800
The RADEON 9800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 6 2025. It features the RDNA 3.5 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1295 MHz to 2900 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 4 nm process technology. It features 40 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 58 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the RADEON E2400 scores 52 versus the RADEON 9800's 58 — the RADEON 9800 leads by 11.5%. The RADEON E2400 is built on GCN 4.0 while the RADEON 9800 uses RDNA 3.5, both on 14 nm vs 4 nm. Shader units: 384 (RADEON E2400) vs 2,560 (RADEON 9800). Raw compute: 0.9085 TFLOPS (RADEON E2400) vs 14.85 TFLOPS (RADEON 9800). Boost clocks: 1124 MHz vs 2900 MHz.
| Feature | RADEON E2400 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 52 | 58+12% |
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | RDNA 3.5 |
| Process Node | 14 nm | 4 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 2560+567% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.9085 TFLOPS | 14.85 TFLOPS+1535% |
| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz | 2900 MHz+158% |
| ROPs | 16 | 64+300% |
| TMUs | 24 | 160+567% |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 8 MB+1500% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | RADEON E2400 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The RADEON E2400 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the RADEON 9800 has 128 MB. The RADEON E2400 offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (RADEON E2400) vs 8 MB (RADEON 9800) — the RADEON 9800 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | RADEON E2400 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+300% | 0.125 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.5 MB | 8 MB+1500% |
Power & Dimensions
The RADEON E2400 draws 50W versus the RADEON 9800's 55W — a 9.5% difference. The RADEON E2400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (RADEON E2400) vs 350W (RADEON 9800). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy.
| Feature | RADEON E2400 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W-9% | 55W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Perf/Watt | 1.0 | 1.1+10% |
Value Analysis
The RADEON E2400 launched at $100 MSRP and currently averages $100, while the RADEON 9800 launched at $399 and now averages $399. The RADEON E2400 costs 74.9% less ($299 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 0.5 (RADEON E2400) vs 0.1 (RADEON 9800) — the RADEON E2400 offers 400% better value. The RADEON 9800 is the newer GPU (2025 vs 2017).
| Feature | RADEON E2400 | RADEON 9800 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $100-75% | $399 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $100-75% | $399 |
| Performance per Dollar | 0.5+400% | 0.1 |
| Codename | Lexa | Strix Halo |
| Release | April 20 2017 | January 6 2025 |
| Ranking | #773 | #98 |
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 RADEON 9800
