Radeon RX 6400 vs GeForce GT 220

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GT 220 and Radeon RX 6400, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GT 220
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 58 Watt
0.57

RX 6400 outperforms GT 220 by a whopping 3358% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1210276
Place by popularitynot in top-100100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data53.42
Power efficiency0.6925.92
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGT216Navi 24
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date12 October 2009 (15 years ago)19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79.99 $159

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 220 and RX 6400 have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores48768
Core clock speed625 MHz1923 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2321 MHz
Number of transistors486 million5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)58 Watt53 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate9.840111.4
Floating-point processing power0.1277 TFLOPS3.565 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs1648
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x4
Length168 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed790 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.3 GB/s128.0 GB/s

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 ConnectorsVGADVIHDMI1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIF + HDAno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.16.7
OpenGL3.14.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

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.

GT 220 0.57
RX 6400 19.71
+3358%

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.

GT 220 219
RX 6400 7603
+3372%

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 HD21
−3233%
700−750
+3233%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.810.23

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−3150%
130−140
+3150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−3300%
170−180
+3300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−3082%
350−400
+3082%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−3233%
200−210
+3233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−3233%
1000−1050
+3233%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−3150%
130−140
+3150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−3300%
170−180
+3300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−3082%
350−400
+3082%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−3233%
200−210
+3233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−2900%
300−310
+2900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−3233%
1000−1050
+3233%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−3150%
130−140
+3150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Hitman 3 5−6
−3300%
170−180
+3300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−3082%
350−400
+3082%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−3233%
200−210
+3233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−2900%
300−310
+2900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−3233%
1000−1050
+3233%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Hitman 3 6−7
−3233%
200−210
+3233%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−2900%
30−33
+2900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−3150%
65−70
+3150%

This is how GT 220 and RX 6400 compete in popular games:

  • RX 6400 is 3233% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.57 19.71
Recency 12 October 2009 19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 58 Watt 53 Watt

RX 6400 has a 3357.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 566.7% more advanced lithography process, and 9.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX 6400 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 220 in performance tests.


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 GT 220
GeForce GT 220
AMD Radeon RX 6400
Radeon RX 6400

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.


3.1 756 votes

Rate GeForce GT 220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 1906 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6400 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.