Radeon X1650 SE vs GeForce 8400

Radeon X1650 SE

2023Boost: 2581 MHz

GeForce 8400

2014Core: 1029 MHzBoost: 1124 MHz

Performance Spectrum - GPU

Radeon X1650 SE

250

0.0%

MOBILITY RADEON 9600/9700

MOBILITY RADEON 9800

Mobility Radeon HD 2300

Mobility Radeon HD 3410

Radeon RX 560X (móvel)

+14.1%

GeForce GTX 1050 Mobile 3 GB

GeForce GTX 970

GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile

GeForce RTX 3080 Ti Laptop 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.

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

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 8400

#647

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

6032%

#649

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

5468%

#650

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

5453%

#654

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

4959%

#655

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

4925%

#657

GeForce 8400

MSRP: $45|Avg: $5

100%

#658

Radeon HD 7520G + HD 7600M Dual

MSRP: $250|Avg: $50

99%

#659

GeForce 9800M GTS

MSRP: $200|Avg: $15

99%

#660

GeForce 8600 GS

MSRP: $100|Avg: $15

99%

#661

Radeon HD 2900 GT

MSRP: $170|Avg: $15

96%

#662

Radeon HD 8280E

MSRP: $150|Avg: $110

95%

#663

Mobility Radeon HD 2600

MSRP: $100|Avg: $30

93%

#664

Radeon R5 M420

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

93%

#665

Radeon HD 8550G + 8690M Dual

MSRP: $400|Avg: $400

92%

#666

Mobility Radeon 4100

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

92%

#667

Radeon HD 2900 XT

MSRP: $399|Avg: $20

92%

#668

GeForce 9700M GT

MSRP: $200|Avg: $40

91%

#669

GeForce 9300 SE

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

91%

#670

Mobility Radeon X2500

MSRP: $50|Avg: $15

91%

#671

GeForce 9800M GTX

MSRP: $300|Avg: $30

84%

#672

Radeon HD 7520G + 8750M Dual

MSRP: $250|Avg: $57

84%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The Radeon X1650 SE is significantly newer (2023 vs 2014). The Radeon X1650 SE likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 8400 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce 8400 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 14.1% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon X1650 SE.

Insight	Radeon X1650 SE	GeForce 8400
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-14.1%)	✅Leading raw performance (+14.1%)
Longevity	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) (7nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / 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

The GeForce 8400 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $5 versus $49 for the Radeon X1650 SE, it costs 90% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 1018% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	Radeon X1650 SE	GeForce 8400
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+1018%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($49)	✅More affordable ($5)

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.

Radeon X1650 SE Benchmark Check

GeForce 8400 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Radeon X1650 SE and GeForce 8400

Radeon X1650 SE

The Radeon X1650 SE is manufactured by AMD. It was released in October 17 2023. It features the RDNA 2.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 2581 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 71 points. Launch price was $549.

GeForce 8400

The GeForce 8400 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 17 2014. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1029 MHz to 1124 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 81 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the Radeon X1650 SE scores 71 versus the GeForce 8400's 81 — the GeForce 8400 leads by 14.1%. The Radeon X1650 SE is built on RDNA 2.0 while the GeForce 8400 uses Maxwell, both on 7 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 2,560 (Radeon X1650 SE) vs 384 (GeForce 8400). Boost clocks: 2581 MHz vs 1124 MHz.

Feature	Radeon X1650 SE	GeForce 8400
G3D Mark Score	71	81+14%
Architecture	RDNA 2.0	Maxwell
Process Node	7 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	2560+567%	384
Boost Clock	2581 MHz+130%	1124 MHz
ROPs	64+700%	8
TMUs	160+900%	16

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	Radeon X1650 SE	GeForce 8400
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.

Feature	Radeon X1650 SE	GeForce 8400
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 9.0c (Radeon X1650 SE) vs 10.0 (GeForce 8400). OpenGL: 2.1 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	Radeon X1650 SE	GeForce 8400
DirectX	9.0c	10.0+11%
OpenGL	2.1	3.3+57%
Max Displays	2	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: Avivo (Radeon X1650 SE) vs No (GeForce 8400). Decoder: Avivo vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,WMV9 (Radeon X1650 SE) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (GeForce 8400).

Feature	Radeon X1650 SE	GeForce 8400
Encoder	Avivo	No
Decoder	Avivo	PureVideo HD VP2
Codecs	MPEG-2,WMV9	MPEG-2,H.264

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The Radeon X1650 SE draws 250W versus the GeForce 8400's 33W — a 153.4% difference. The GeForce 8400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon X1650 SE) vs 350W (GeForce 8400). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 65°C.

Feature	Radeon X1650 SE	GeForce 8400
TDP	250W	33W-87%
Recommended PSU	350W	350W
Power Connector	PCIe-powered	Legacy
Length	—	170mm
Height	—	106mm
Slots	1	1
Temp (Load)	75°C	65°C-13%
Perf/Watt	0.3	2.5+733%

💰

Value Analysis

The Radeon X1650 SE launched at $0 MSRP and currently averages $49, while the GeForce 8400 launched at $45 and now averages $5. The GeForce 8400 costs 89.8% less ($44 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 1.4 (Radeon X1650 SE) vs 16.2 (GeForce 8400) — the GeForce 8400 offers 1057.1% better value. The Radeon X1650 SE is the newer GPU (2023 vs 2014).