GeForce FX Go5650 vs 9400M GeForceBoost

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Architectureno dataRankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameno dataNV31
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 June 2008 (16 years ago)1 March 2003 (21 year 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 cores24no data
Core clock speedno data325 MHz
Number of transistorsno data80 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm130 nm
Texture fill rateno data1.300
ROPsno data4
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 dataAGP 8x

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 data128 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data295 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data9.44 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX109.0a
OpenGLno data1.5 (2.1)
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 June 2008 1 March 2003
Chip lithography 65 nm 130 nm

9400M GeForceBoost has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 9400M GeForceBoost and GeForce FX Go5650. We've got no test results to judge.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 9400M GeForceBoost
GeForce 9400M GeForceBoost
NVIDIA GeForce FX Go5650
GeForce FX Go5650

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


2.4 14 votes

Rate GeForce 9400M GeForceBoost on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate GeForce FX Go5650 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.