ATI Radeon IGP 340M vs GeForce Go 7400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce Go 7400 and Radeon IGP 340M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Go 7400
2006
128 MB GDDR3
0.17
+1600%

Go 7400 outperforms ATI IGP 340M by a whopping 1600% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking14231544
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Rage 6 (2000−2007)
GPU code nameG72RS200
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 February 2006 (19 years ago)5 October 2002 (22 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 cores72
Core clock speed450 MHz183 MHz
Boost clock speed450 MHz180 MHz
Number of transistors112 million30 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm180 nm
Texture fill rate1.8000.37
ROPs22
TMUs42

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 1.0 x16AGP 4x
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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount128 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed450 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth7.2 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)7.0
Shader Model3.0no data
OpenGL2.11.4
OpenCLN/AN/A
VulkanN/AN/A

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.

Go 7400 0.17
+1600%
ATI IGP 340M 0.01

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.

Go 7400 65
+3150%
ATI IGP 340M 2

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Valorant 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+12.5%
8−9
−12.5%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Go 7400 is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Go 7400 is ahead in 14 tests (45%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (55%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.17 0.01
Recency 1 February 2006 5 October 2002
Chip lithography 90 nm 180 nm

Go 7400 has a 1600% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce Go 7400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon IGP 340M 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.


NVIDIA GeForce Go 7400
GeForce Go 7400
ATI Radeon IGP 340M
Radeon IGP 340M

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 7 votes

Rate GeForce Go 7400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Radeon IGP 340M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce Go 7400 or Radeon IGP 340M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.