ATI Radeon X1650 vs HD Graphics 400

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1073not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency13.09no data
ArchitectureGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)R500 (2005−2007)
GPU code nameBraswell GT1RV516
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 April 2015 (9 years ago)20 November 2007 (17 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 cores96no data
Core clock speed320 MHz635 MHz
Boost clock speed600 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million107 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)6 Wattno data
Texture fill rate7.2002.540
Floating-point processing power0.1152 TFLOPSno data
ROPs24
TMUs124

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).

InterfaceRing BusPCIe 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 typeDDR3LDDR2
Maximum RAM amount8 GB256 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared392 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data6.272 GB/s
Shared memory+no data

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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model5.13.0
OpenGL4.32.0
OpenCL3.0N/A
Vulkan+N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 April 2015 20 November 2007
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 80 nm

HD Graphics 400 has an age advantage of 7 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between HD Graphics 400 and Radeon X1650. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that HD Graphics 400 is a notebook card while Radeon X1650 is a desktop one.


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

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
HD Graphics 400
ATI Radeon X1650
Radeon X1650

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.5 404 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 65 votes

Rate Radeon X1650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.