Radeon RX 6400 vs Quadro FX 1600M

Place in the ranking	1295	279
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.01	53.99
Power efficiency	0.47	25.60
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code name	G84	Navi 24
Market segment	Mobile workstation	Desktop
Release date	1 June 2007 (17 years ago)	19 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$149.90	$159

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6400 has 539800% better value for money than FX 1600M.

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 cores	32	768
Core clock speed	625 MHz	1923 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2321 MHz
Number of transistors	289 million	5,400 million
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	53 Watt
Texture fill rate	10.00	111.4
Floating-point processing power	0.08 TFLOPS	3.565 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	32
TMUs	16	48
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	12

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 size	large	no data
Interface	MXM-HE	PCIe 4.0 x4
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	25.6 GB/s	128.0 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.7
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	1.1	-

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.

FX 1600M 0.34

RX 6400 19.79
+5721%

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.

FX 1600M 131

RX 6400 7626
+5721%

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

Cyberpunk 2077

2−3
−5400%

110−120

+5400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −5567%	170−180 +5567%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Hitman 3	4−5 −5650%	230−240 +5650%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −5525%	450−500 +5525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −5650%	230−240 +5650%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −5614%	1600−1650 +5614%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −5567%	170−180 +5567%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Hitman 3	4−5 −5650%	230−240 +5650%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −5525%	450−500 +5525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −5650%	230−240 +5650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −5456%	500−550 +5456%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −5614%	1600−1650 +5614%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4 −5567%	170−180 +5567%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%
Hitman 3	4−5 −5650%	230−240 +5650%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −5525%	450−500 +5525%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	4−5 −5650%	230−240 +5650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10 −5456%	500−550 +5456%
Watch Dogs: Legion	27−30 −5614%	1600−1650 +5614%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 −4900%	300−310 +4900%
Horizon Zero Dawn	2−3 −5400%	110−120 +5400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3
−5400%

110−120

+5400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −5400%	55−60 +5400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3
−5400%

110−120

+5400%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.34	19.79
Recency	1 June 2007	19 January 2022
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	4 GB
Chip lithography	80 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	50 Watt	53 Watt

FX 1600M has 6% lower power consumption.

RX 6400, on the other hand, has a 5720.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro FX 1600M in performance tests.

Be aware that Quadro FX 1600M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon RX 6400 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.