ATI Radeon X1600 PRO vs HD Graphics 405
Aggregate performance score
We've compared HD Graphics 405 with Radeon X1600 PRO, including specs and performance data.
HD Graphics 405 outperforms X1600 PRO by a whopping 200% 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 | 1232 | 1437 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 8.86 | 0.43 |
| Architecture | Generation 8.0 (2014−2015) | R500 (2005−2007) |
| GPU code name | Braswell GT1 | RV530 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 April 2015 (11 years ago) | 1 October 2007 (18 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $199 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 128 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 600 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 189 million | 157 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 41 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 9.600 | 2.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.1536 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 2 | 4 |
| TMUs | 16 | 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 | Ring Bus | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | System Shared | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 390 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 12.48 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
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 | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 2.0 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | N/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 HD | 15
+200%
| 5−6
−200%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 39.80 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+222%
|
9−10
−222%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 20−22
+233%
|
6−7
−233%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+200%
|
4−5
−200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+222%
|
9−10
−222%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12−14
+200%
|
4−5
−200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+222%
|
9−10
−222%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+250%
|
2−3
−250%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+250%
|
4−5
−250%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
This is how HD Graphics 405 and ATI X1600 PRO compete in popular games:
- HD Graphics 405 is 200% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.69 | 0.23 |
| Recency | 1 April 2015 | 1 October 2007 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 41 Watt |
HD Graphics 405 has a 200% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 543% more advanced lithography process, and 583% lower power consumption.
The HD Graphics 405 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1600 PRO in performance tests.
Be aware that HD Graphics 405 is a notebook graphics card while Radeon X1600 PRO 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.
