ATI Radeon X1050 vs HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) with Radeon X1050, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)
2016
0.41
+242%

HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) outperforms X1050 by a whopping 242% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13131503
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data0.39
ArchitectureGen. 8 (2015−2016)Rage 9 (2003−2006)
GPU code nameBraswellRV370
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 April 2016 (9 years ago)7 December 2006 (18 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores12no data
Core clock speed320 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed640 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data107 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data24 Watt
Texture fill rateno data1.600
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data4

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 1.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeno dataDDR2
Maximum RAM amountno data128 MB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data333 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data5.328 GB/s
Shared memory+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 Connectorsno data1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.29.0
OpenGLno data2.0
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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 HD8
+300%
2−3
−300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Valorant 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
+275%
4−5
−275%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Valorant 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Valorant 24−27
+271%
7−8
−271%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+250%
4−5
−250%
Valorant 2−3 0−1

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3 0−1

This is how HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) and ATI X1050 compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) is 300% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.41 0.12
Recency 1 April 2016 7 December 2006
Chip lithography 14 nm 110 nm

HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) has a 241.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 685.7% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1050 in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) is a notebook graphics card while Radeon X1050 is a desktop one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)
ATI Radeon X1050
Radeon X1050

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.


2.1 257 votes

Rate HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 21 votes

Rate Radeon X1050 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) or Radeon X1050, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.