Radeon X1600 Pro vs GeForce 9400M
Radeon X1600 Pro
Popular choices:
GeForce 9400M
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 X1600 Pro is positioned at rank 342 and the GeForce 9400M is on rank 477, so the Radeon X1600 Pro offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon X1600 Pro
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9400M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon X1600 Pro uses modern memory architecture. The Radeon X1600 Pro likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 9400M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 9400M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon X1600 Pro.
| Insight | Radeon X1600 Pro | GeForce 9400M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 1.0 (2019−2020) (7nm) | 🛑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
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce 9400M 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 X1600 Pro and GeForce 9400M
Radeon X1600 Pro
The Radeon X1600 Pro is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 21 2020. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1130 MHz to 1560 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 99 points.
GeForce 9400M
The GeForce 9400M 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: 101 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon X1600 Pro scores 99 and the GeForce 9400M reaches 101 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon X1600 Pro is built on RDNA 1.0 while the GeForce 9400M uses Maxwell, both on 7 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 384 (GeForce 9400M). Raw compute: 6.39 TFLOPS (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce 9400M). Boost clocks: 1560 MHz vs 1176 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | GeForce 9400M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 99 | 101+2% |
| Architecture | RDNA 1.0 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+433% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 6.39 TFLOPS+607% | 0.9032 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1560 MHz+33% | 1176 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+700% | 8 |
| TMUs | 128+433% | 24 |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+200% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | GeForce 9400M |
|---|---|---|
| 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: 3 MB (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 1 MB (GeForce 9400M) — the Radeon X1600 Pro has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | GeForce 9400M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 128-bit+100% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+200% | 1 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0c (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 11.1 (FL10_0) (GeForce 9400M). OpenGL: 2.1 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | GeForce 9400M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0c | 11.1 (FL10_0)+23% |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 3.3+57% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Decoder: Avivo vs PureVideo HD (VP3). Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 (GeForce 9400M).
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | GeForce 9400M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | None | — |
| Decoder | Avivo | PureVideo HD (VP3) |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon X1600 Pro draws 150W versus the GeForce 9400M's 33W — a 127.9% difference. The GeForce 9400M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 350W (GeForce 9400M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 70°C.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | GeForce 9400M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 150W | 33W-78% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | 168mm | — |
| Height | 111mm | — |
| Slots | 1 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | 70°C-7% |
| Perf/Watt | 0.7 | 3.1+343% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon X1600 Pro is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2015).
| Feature | Radeon X1600 Pro | GeForce 9400M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | — |
| Codename | Navi 10 | GM108 |
| Release | January 21 2020 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #216 | #847 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon X1600 Pro and GeForce 9400M
