ATI Radeon HD 2400 PRO vs RX Vega 64

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 64 and Radeon HD 2400 PRO, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega 64
2017, $499
8 GB HBM2, 295 Watt
33.29
+12230%

RX Vega 64 outperforms HD 2400 PRO by a whopping 12230% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1751407
Place by popularitynot in top-10068
Cost-effectiveness evaluation16.69no data
Power efficiency8.661.04
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameVega 10RV610
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date7 August 2017 (8 years ago)28 June 2007 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

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 cores409640
Core clock speed1247 MHz525 MHz
Boost clock speed1546 MHzno data
Number of transistors12,500 million180 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)295 Watt20 Watt
Texture fill rate395.82.100
Floating-point processing power12.66 TFLOPS0.042 TFLOPS
ROPs644
TMUs2564
L1 Cache1 MBno data
L2 Cache4 MB32 KB

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 1.0 x16
Length279 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone

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 typeHBM2DDR2
Maximum RAM amount8 GB256 MB
Memory bus width2048 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed945 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth483.8 GB/s6.4 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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)10.0 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan1.1.125N/A

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

RX Vega 64 33.29
+12230%
ATI HD 2400 PRO 0.27

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

RX Vega 64 13924
+12114%
Samples: 3312
ATI HD 2400 PRO 114
Samples: 500

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 HD1160−1
1440p770−1
4K51-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.30no data
1440p6.48no data
4K9.78no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 180−190
+18800%
1−2
−18800%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 75−80 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 161
+16000%
1−2
−16000%
Counter-Strike 2 180−190
+18800%
1−2
−18800%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 0−1
Far Cry 5 110 0−1
Fortnite 150−160
+14900%
1−2
−14900%
Forza Horizon 4 167
+16600%
1−2
−16600%
Forza Horizon 5 100−110 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 75−80 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+13400%
1−2
−13400%
Valorant 315
+15650%
2−3
−15650%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 146
+14500%
1−2
−14500%
Counter-Strike 2 180−190
+18800%
1−2
−18800%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+13800%
2−3
−13800%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 0−1
Dota 2 150
+14900%
1−2
−14900%
Far Cry 5 104 0−1
Fortnite 150−160
+14900%
1−2
−14900%
Forza Horizon 4 158
+15700%
1−2
−15700%
Forza Horizon 5 100−110 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 110−120 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 75−80 0−1
Metro Exodus 73 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+13400%
1−2
−13400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 132
+13100%
1−2
−13100%
Valorant 293
+14550%
2−3
−14550%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 139
+13800%
1−2
−13800%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80 0−1
Dota 2 138
+13700%
1−2
−13700%
Far Cry 5 98 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 128
+12700%
1−2
−12700%
Hogwarts Legacy 75−80 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+13400%
1−2
−13400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 77 0−1
Valorant 140
+13900%
1−2
−13900%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 150−160
+14900%
1−2
−14900%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 80−85 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 230−240
+23500%
1−2
−23500%
Grand Theft Auto V 65−70 0−1
Metro Exodus 46 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+17400%
1−2
−17400%
Valorant 263
+13050%
2−3
−13050%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 85−90 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 81 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 98 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 35−40 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 60−65 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 85−90 0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 70−75 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24 0−1
Metro Exodus 46 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 48 0−1
Valorant 205
+20400%
1−2
−20400%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 59 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 35−40 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 0−1
Dota 2 96 0−1
Far Cry 5 44 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 66 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 21−24 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 40−45 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.29 0.27
Recency 7 August 2017 28 June 2007
Maximum RAM amount 8 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 295 Watt 20 Watt

RX Vega 64 has a 12229.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 364.3% more advanced lithography process.

ATI HD 2400 PRO, on the other hand, has 1375% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 2400 PRO in performance tests.

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.


AMD Radeon RX Vega 64
Radeon RX Vega 64
ATI Radeon HD 2400 PRO
Radeon HD 2400 PRO

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.


4.3 855 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 70 votes

Rate Radeon HD 2400 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 64 or Radeon HD 2400 PRO, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.