GeForce Go 6400 vs Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) and GeForce Go 6400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L)
2014
0.99
+1550%

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) outperforms Go 6400 by a whopping 1550% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11611543
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN 1.1 (2014)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameBeemaNV44 A2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date29 April 2014 (12 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 cores1287
Core clock speedno data400 MHz
Boost clock speed850 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistorsno data75 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm110 nm
Texture fill rateno data1.600
ROPsno data2
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

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 dataDDR
Maximum RAM amountno data32 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data350 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data5.6 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)9.0c (9_3)
Shader Modelno data3.0
OpenGLno data2.1
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 HD6-0−1

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 1−2 0−1
Fortnite 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Valorant 30−35
+29.2%
24−27
−29.2%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
+150%
10−11
−150%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Fortnite 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Valorant 30−35
+29.2%
24−27
−29.2%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 14−16
+87.5%
8−9
−87.5%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Valorant 30−35
+29.2%
24−27
−29.2%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 1−2 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 6−7 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%

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 1−2 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 5−6 0−1

4K
Ultra

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 R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) is 1000% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) performs better in 20 tests (95%)
  • there's a draw in 1 test (5%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.99 0.06
Recency 29 April 2014 1 February 2006
Chip lithography 28 nm 110 nm

R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) has a 1550% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 293% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) 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.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3 25 votes

Rate Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 3 votes

Rate GeForce Go 6400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) or GeForce Go 6400, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.