GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile vs ATI Radeon X1600 PRO

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon X1600 PRO with GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

ATI X1600 PRO
2007
256 MB GDDR3, 41 Watt
0.25

RTX 4050 Mobile outperforms ATI X1600 PRO by a whopping 14916% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1361124
Place by popularitynot in top-10042
Power efficiency0.4251.78
ArchitectureR500 (2005−2007)Ada Lovelace (2022−2024)
GPU code nameRV530AD107
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 October 2007 (17 years ago)3 January 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 coresno data2560
Core clock speed500 MHz1455 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1755 MHz
Number of transistors157 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology90 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)41 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate2.000140.4
Floating-point processing powerno data8.986 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs480
Tensor Coresno data80
Ray Tracing Coresno data20

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 sizeno datalarge
InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit96 Bit
Memory clock speed390 MHz16000 GB/s
Memory bandwidth12.48 GB/s192.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model3.06.7
OpenGL2.04.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.9

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

ATI X1600 PRO 0.25
RTX 4050 Mobile 37.54
+14916%

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.

ATI X1600 PRO 98
RTX 4050 Mobile 14429
+14623%

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 HD0−195
1440p-0−148
4K-0−131

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 79
+0%
79
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 103
+0%
103
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 71
+0%
71
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 41
+0%
41
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 204
+0%
204
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 102
+0%
102
+0%
Metro Exodus 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Valorant 185
+0%
185
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 59
+0%
59
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 36
+0%
36
+0%
Dota 2 140
+0%
140
+0%
Far Cry 5 97
+0%
97
+0%
Fortnite 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 168
+0%
168
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 126
+0%
126
+0%
Metro Exodus 32
+0%
32
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
World of Tanks 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 51
+0%
51
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 33
+0%
33
+0%
Dota 2 162
+0%
162
+0%
Far Cry 5 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 145
+0%
145
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 80
+0%
80
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%
Valorant 138
+0%
138
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 58
+0%
58
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 58
+0%
58
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
World of Tanks 230−240
+0%
230−240
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 29
+0%
29
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Far Cry 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 84
+0%
84
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 59
+0%
59
+0%
Valorant 92
+0%
92
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8
+0%
8
+0%
Dota 2 64
+0%
64
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 64
+0%
64
+0%
Metro Exodus 45
+0%
45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 64
+0%
64
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+0%
9
+0%
Dota 2 115
+0%
115
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 53
+0%
53
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.25 37.54
Recency 1 October 2007 3 January 2023
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 6 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 41 Watt 50 Watt

ATI X1600 PRO has 22% lower power consumption.

RTX 4050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 14916% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 2150% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1600 PRO in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon X1600 PRO is a desktop card while GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile is a notebook 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.


ATI Radeon X1600 PRO
Radeon X1600 PRO
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile

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.


3.1 124 votes

Rate Radeon X1600 PRO on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 2923 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 4050 Mobile 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.