Radeon HD 2400 vs GeForce 315M
Radeon HD 2400
Popular choices:
GeForce 315M
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 HD 2400 is positioned at rank 323 and the GeForce 315M is on rank 535, so the Radeon HD 2400 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 2400
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 315M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 315M is significantly newer (2015 vs 2009). The GeForce 315M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon HD 2400 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon HD 2400 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 5.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 315M.
| Insight | Radeon HD 2400 | GeForce 315M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+5.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-5.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2009 / TeraScale (2005−2013)) | 🛑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 | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the Radeon HD 2400 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 HD 2400 and GeForce 315M
Radeon HD 2400
The Radeon HD 2400 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in April 2 2009. It features the TeraScale architecture. The core clock speed is 850 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 190W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 121 points. Launch price was $249.
GeForce 315M
The GeForce 315M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 27 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 928 MHz to 1020 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 115 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the Radeon HD 2400 scores 121 versus the GeForce 315M's 115 — the Radeon HD 2400 leads by 5.2%. The Radeon HD 2400 is built on TeraScale while the GeForce 315M uses Maxwell, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (Radeon HD 2400) vs 640 (GeForce 315M). Raw compute: 1.36 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 2400) vs 1.306 TFLOPS (GeForce 315M).
| Feature | Radeon HD 2400 | GeForce 315M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 121+5% | 115 |
| Architecture | TeraScale | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+25% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.36 TFLOPS+4% | 1.306 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 40 | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 160 KB | 320 KB+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 2400 | GeForce 315M |
|---|---|---|
| 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. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Radeon HD 2400) vs 2 MB (GeForce 315M) — the GeForce 315M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon HD 2400 | GeForce 315M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 2 MB+700% |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 2400 draws 190W versus the GeForce 315M's 75W — a 86.8% difference. The GeForce 315M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 2400) vs 350W (GeForce 315M). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs Legacy.
| Feature | Radeon HD 2400 | GeForce 315M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 190W | 75W-61% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | Legacy |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.6 | 1.5+150% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 315M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2009).
| Feature | Radeon HD 2400 | GeForce 315M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $79 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10 | — |
| Codename | RV790 | GM107 |
| Release | April 2 2009 | October 27 2015 |
| Ranking | #762 | #671 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 2400 and GeForce 315M
