Radeon RX Vega M vs ATI E2400
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon E2400 with Radeon RX Vega M, including specs and performance data.
M outperforms E2400 by a whopping 13017% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1515 | 379 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.37 | 81.18 |
| Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) |
| GPU code name | RV610 | Vega |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 28 June 2007 (19 years ago) | 1 February 2018 (8 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 40 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 600 MHz | 720 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1190 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 180 million | 4,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 15 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 2.400 | 38.08 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.048 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 4 | 8 |
| TMUs | 4 | 32 |
| L2 Cache | 32 KB | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | MXM-II | IGP |
| Width | no data | IGP |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR3 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 128 MB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | System Shared |
| Memory bandwidth | 11.2 GB/s | no data |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10.0 (10_0) | 12.0 |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.12 | 15.74 |
| Recency | 28 June 2007 | 1 February 2018 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 15 Watt |
RX Vega M has a 13017% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 364% more advanced lithography process, and 67% lower power consumption.
The Radeon RX Vega M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon E2400 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon E2400 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon RX Vega M is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
