Radeon X1600 vs FirePro 2450
Radeon X1600
Popular choices:
FirePro 2450
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. The Radeon X1600 is positioned at rank #364 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon X1600
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon X1600 is significantly newer (2020 vs 2013). The Radeon X1600 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The FirePro 2450 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The FirePro 2450 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon X1600.
| Insight | Radeon X1600 | FirePro 2450 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-4.1%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+4.1%) |
| Longevity | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (7nm) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| 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 | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The FirePro 2450 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $10 versus $49 for the Radeon X1600, it costs 80% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 410% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon X1600 | FirePro 2450 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+410%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49) | ✅More affordable ($10) |
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 and FirePro 2450
Radeon X1600
The Radeon X1600 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 28 2020. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 2105 MHz. It has 4608 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 255W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 49 points.
FirePro 2450
The FirePro 2450 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 16 2013. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 715 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 51 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon X1600 scores 49 and the FirePro 2450 reaches 51 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon X1600 is built on RDNA 2.0 while the FirePro 2450 uses GCN 1.0, both on 7 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 4,608 (Radeon X1600) vs 384 (FirePro 2450). Raw compute: 19.4 TFLOPS (Radeon X1600) vs 0.5491 TFLOPS (FirePro 2450).
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | FirePro 2450 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 49 | 51+4% |
| Architecture | RDNA 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 7 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 4608+1100% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 19.4 TFLOPS+3433% | 0.5491 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64+700% | 8 |
| TMUs | 288+1100% | 24 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | FirePro 2450 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | FirePro 2450 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 64-bit | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9_0c (Radeon X1600) vs 10.1 (FirePro 2450). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | FirePro 2450 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9_0c | 10.1+12% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: Avivo (Radeon X1600) vs UVD (FirePro 2450). Decoder: Avivo vs UVD.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | FirePro 2450 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | Avivo | UVD |
| Decoder | Avivo | UVD |
| Codecs | — | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon X1600 draws 255W versus the FirePro 2450's 150W — a 51.9% difference. The FirePro 2450 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon X1600) vs 350W (FirePro 2450). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 168mm vs 170mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | FirePro 2450 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 255W | 150W-41% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 168mm | 170mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 60°C |
| Perf/Watt | 0.2 | 0.3+50% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon X1600 launched at $199 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the FirePro 2450 launched at $0 and now averages $10. The FirePro 2450 costs 79.6% less ($39 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 1.0 (Radeon X1600) vs 5.1 (FirePro 2450) — the FirePro 2450 offers 410% better value. The Radeon X1600 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2013).
| Feature | Radeon X1600 | FirePro 2450 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $199 | $0-100% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $49 | $10-80% |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.0 | 5.1+410% |
| Codename | Navi 21 | Opal |
| Release | October 28 2020 | October 16 2013 |
| Ranking | #34 | #879 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon X1600 and FirePro 2450
