Radeon X1600 Pro
VS
GeForce 9500M

Radeon X1600 Pro vs GeForce 9500M

AMD

Radeon X1600 Pro

2020Core: 1130 MHzBoost: 1560 MHz
VS
NVIDIA

GeForce 9500M

2015Core: 928 MHzBoost: 1020 MHz

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 9500M is on rank 557, so the Radeon X1600 Pro offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Radeon X1600 Pro

#1
GeForce RTX 3060 Ti
MSRP: $399|Avg: $280
10991%
#2
GeForce RTX 5060
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
10559%
#3
Radeon RX 5600 XT
MSRP: $279|Avg: $180
10436%
#4
Radeon RX 9060
MSRP: $249|Avg: $249
10418%
#5
GeForce RTX 5050
MSRP: $249|Avg: $249
10397%
#6
GeForce RTX 3050 OEM
MSRP: $249|Avg: $150
10338%
#7
Arc A580
MSRP: $179|Avg: $179
10208%
#8
Radeon RX 9060 XT
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
10170%
#9
Radeon RX 9060 XT 8GB
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
10076%
#10
Radeon RX 7600
MSRP: $269|Avg: $250
10048%
#11
Radeon RX 6600
MSRP: $329|Avg: $180
9927%
#12
GeForce RTX 4060
MSRP: $299|Avg: $299
9906%
#13
Arc B570
MSRP: $219|Avg: $219
9727%
#14
Arc B580
MSRP: $249|Avg: $249
9721%
#327
Radeon R5 430 OEM
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $13
12121%
#342
Radeon X1600 Pro
MSRP: $149|Avg: $49
100%
#343
RADEON X300SE
MSRP: $60|Avg: $60
95%
#345
Radeon X1600 XT
MSRP: $199|Avg: $15
88%
#346
RADEON X800 GTO
MSRP: $199|Avg: $199
88%
#347
Radeon X1300
MSRP: $100|Avg: $49
88%
#348
Radeon X1800 GTO
MSRP: $249|Avg: $20
86%
#349
GeForce 7800 GT
MSRP: $449|Avg: $20
82%
#351
RADEON E2400
MSRP: $100|Avg: $100
79%
#352
Radeon X1650 GTO
MSRP: $150|Avg: $20
76%
#353
RADEON X800GT
MSRP: $160|Avg: $10
76%
#354
RADEON X600 SE
MSRP: $100|Avg: $5
74%
#355
Radeon X1900 GT
MSRP: $299|Avg: $20
74%
#356
RADEON X700
MSRP: $149|Avg: $10
74%
#357
GeForce G200
MSRP: $299|Avg: $15
68%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9500M

#547
Radeon RX 550X (móvel)
MSRP: $35|Avg: $35
3129%
#549
2836%
#550
2829%
#554
GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50
2572%
#555
Radeon RX 6300
MSRP: $60|Avg: $40
2555%
#557
GeForce 9500M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#558
100%
#559
Radeon HD 8690A
MSRP: $150|Avg: $150
99%
#560
98%
#561
97%
#562
GeForce 9200
MSRP: $50|Avg: $15
97%
#563
97%
#564
Radeon R7 M265DX
MSRP: $149|Avg: $40
97%
#565
Radeon R9 M375
MSRP: $300|Avg: $300
96%
#567
95%
#568
95%
#569
95%
#570
95%
#571
Radeon R5 M315
MSRP: $150|Avg: $150
94%
#572
Qualcomm Adreno 8cx Gen 3
MSRP: $599|Avg: $300
94%
Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

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 9500M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce 9500M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 5.1% 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.

InsightRadeon X1600 ProGeForce 9500M
Performance
Lower raw frame rates (-5.1%)
Leading raw performance (+5.1%)
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 9500M 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 9500M

AMD

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.

NVIDIA

GeForce 9500M

The GeForce 9500M 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: 104 points.

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the Radeon X1600 Pro scores 99 versus the GeForce 9500M's 104 — the GeForce 9500M leads by 5.1%. The Radeon X1600 Pro is built on RDNA 1.0 while the GeForce 9500M uses Maxwell, both on 7 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 640 (GeForce 9500M). Raw compute: 6.39 TFLOPS (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 1.306 TFLOPS (GeForce 9500M). Boost clocks: 1560 MHz vs 1020 MHz.

FeatureRadeon X1600 ProGeForce 9500M
G3D Mark Score
99
104+5%
Architecture
RDNA 1.0
Maxwell
Process Node
7 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
2048+220%
640
Compute (TFLOPS)
6.39 TFLOPS+389%
1.306 TFLOPS
Boost Clock
1560 MHz+53%
1020 MHz
ROPs
64+300%
16
TMUs
128+220%
40
L2 Cache
3 MB+50%
2 MB

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

FeatureRadeon X1600 ProGeForce 9500M
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 2 MB (GeForce 9500M) — the Radeon X1600 Pro has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureRadeon X1600 ProGeForce 9500M
VRAM Capacity
0.5 GB
0.5 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Bus Width
64-bit
128-bit+100%
L2 Cache
3 MB+50%
2 MB
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 9.0c (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce 9500M). OpenGL: 2.1 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

FeatureRadeon X1600 ProGeForce 9500M
DirectX
9.0c
11.1 (10_0)+23%
OpenGL
2.1
3.3+57%
Max Displays
2
2
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: None (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs No NVENC (G84) (GeForce 9500M). Decoder: Avivo vs PureVideo HD VP3. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce 9500M).

FeatureRadeon X1600 ProGeForce 9500M
Encoder
None
No NVENC (G84)
Decoder
Avivo
PureVideo HD VP3
Codecs
MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1
H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon X1600 Pro draws 150W versus the GeForce 9500M's 75W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce 9500M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon X1600 Pro) vs 350W (GeForce 9500M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 85°C.

FeatureRadeon X1600 ProGeForce 9500M
TDP
150W
75W-50%
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
PCIe-powered
Legacy
Length
168mm
Height
111mm
Slots
1
0-100%
Temp (Load)
75-12%
85°C
Perf/Watt
0.7
1.4+100%
💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon X1600 Pro is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2015).

FeatureRadeon X1600 ProGeForce 9500M
MSRP
$149
Avg Price (30d)
$49
Codename
Navi 10
GM107
Release
January 21 2020
October 27 2015
Ranking
#216
#671