Radeon 740M vs ATI X1600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X1600 and Radeon 740M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

ATI X1600
2007
512 MB DDR2, 27 Watt
0.12

740M outperforms X1600 by a whopping 5792% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1521603
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.3412.15
ArchitectureUltra-Threaded SE (2005−2007)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2026)
GPU code nameRV516Phoenix2
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date2007 (19 years ago)31 January 2024 (2 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 coresno data256
Core clock speed635 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2800 MHz
Number of transistors105 million20,900 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)27 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate2.54044.80
Floating-point processing powerno data2.867 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs416
Ray Tracing Coresno data4
L0 Cacheno data64 KB
L1 Cacheno data64 KB
L2 Cacheno data2 MB

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeDDR2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MBpsSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoMotherboard Dependent

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.8
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A2.1
VulkanN/A1.3

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.

ATI X1600 0.12
Radeon 740M 7.07
+5792%

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.

ATI X1600 49
Samples: 5
Radeon 740M 2946
+5912%
Samples: 2156

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD-0−121

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 73
+0%
73
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Palworld 42
+0%
42
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 18
+0%
18
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 60
+0%
60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Palworld 35
+0%
35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 26
+0%
26
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 27
+0%
27
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Palworld 17
+0%
17
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Palworld 15
+0%
15
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Palworld 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Palworld 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Palworld 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 62 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.12 7.07
Chip lithography 90 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 27 Watt 45 Watt

ATI X1600 has 67% lower power consumption.

Radeon 740M, on the other hand, has a 5792% higher aggregate performance score, and a 2150% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon 740M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1600 in performance tests.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.1 85 votes

Rate Radeon X1600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 197 votes

Rate Radeon 740M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon X1600 or Radeon 740M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.