GeForce2 MX 400 vs Radeon HD 7500G

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1142not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.35no data
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)Celsius (1999−2005)
GPU code nameDevastator LiteNV11 B2
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 May 2012 (12 years ago)3 March 2001 (23 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 cores256no data
Core clock speed327 MHz200 MHz
Boost clock speed424 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,303 million20 million
Manufacturing process technology32 nm180 nm
Power consumption (TDP)17 Wattno data
Texture fill rate6.7840.8
Floating-point processing power0.2171 TFLOPSno data
ROPs82
TMUs164

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).

InterfaceIGPAGP 4x
Widthno data1-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 typeSystem SharedSDR
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared32 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared166 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data2.656 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)7.0
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.41.2
OpenCL1.2N/A
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 May 2012 3 March 2001
Chip lithography 32 nm 180 nm

HD 7500G has an age advantage of 11 years, and a 462.5% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 7500G and GeForce2 MX 400. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 7500G is a notebook card while GeForce2 MX 400 is a desktop 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.


AMD Radeon HD 7500G
Radeon HD 7500G
NVIDIA GeForce2 MX 400
GeForce2 MX 400

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.


2.8 68 votes

Rate Radeon HD 7500G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 118 votes

Rate GeForce2 MX 400 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.