GeForce Go 6400 vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5730
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 5730 and GeForce Go 6400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Mobility HD 5730 outperforms Go 6400 by a whopping 2083% 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 | 1070 | 1543 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.88 | no data |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | Madison | NV44 A2 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (16 years ago) | 1 February 2006 (20 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 cores | 400 | 7 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 627 million | 75 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 26 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | 13.00 | 1.600 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.52 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | 2 |
| TMUs | 20 | 4 |
| L1 Cache | 40 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | no data |
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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
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 | GDDR3 | DDR |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 32 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 350 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 5.6 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 | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | N/A |
| Vulkan | N/A | 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:
| 900p | 14 | 0−1 |
| Full HD | 18 | 0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+41.7%
|
24−27
−41.7%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−33
+200%
|
10−11
−200%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+113%
|
8−9
−113%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+41.7%
|
24−27
−41.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 16−18
+113%
|
8−9
−113%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+28.6%
|
7−8
−28.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+75%
|
4−5
−75%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+41.7%
|
24−27
−41.7%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5 | 0−1 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| Valorant | 4−5 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 6−7 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the ATI Mobility HD 5730 is 1300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- ATI Mobility HD 5730 performs better in 20 tests (95%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (5%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.31 | 0.06 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 1 February 2006 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 110 nm |
ATI Mobility HD 5730 has a 2083% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 175% more advanced lithography process.
The Mobility Radeon HD 5730 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 6400 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.
