ATI Radeon X1050 vs GeForce 8400 GS

Place in the ranking	1256	1437
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	0.68	0.37
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Rage 9 (2003−2006)
GPU code name	G86	RV370
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	17 April 2007 (17 years ago)	7 December 2006 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$29.99	no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	16	no data
Core clock speed	459 MHz	400 MHz
Number of transistors	210 million	107 million
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	24 Watt
Texture fill rate	3.672	1.600
Floating-point processing power	0.02938 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	4	4
TMUs	8	4

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	PCIe 1.0 x16	PCIe 1.0 x16
Length	170 mm	no data
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
SLI options	+	-

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	DDR2	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	128 MB
Standard memory config per GPU	256 MB	no data
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	400 MHz	333 MHz
Memory bandwidth	6.4 GB/s	5.328 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	9.0
Shader Model	4.0	no data
OpenGL	2.1	2.0
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.1	-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

8400 GS 0.40
+208%

ATI X1050 0.13

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.

8400 GS 154
+214%

ATI X1050 49

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	0.40	0.13
Recency	17 April 2007	7 December 2006
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	128 MB
Chip lithography	80 nm	110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	40 Watt	24 Watt

8400 GS has a 207.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.

ATI X1050, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce 8400 GS is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1050 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.