T400 vs ATI Radeon X1650

Place in the ranking	1397	471
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	no data	21.50
Architecture	R500 (2005−2007)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	RV516	TU117
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	20 November 2007 (17 years ago)	6 May 2021 (3 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 cores	no data	384
Core clock speed	635 MHz	420 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1425 MHz
Number of transistors	107 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	30 Watt
Texture fill rate	2.540	34.20
Floating-point processing power	no data	1.094 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	16
TMUs	4	24

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).

Interface	PCIe 1.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Width	1-slot	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	DDR2	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	2 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	392 MHz	1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	6.272 GB/s	80 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 Connectors

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

3x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX	9.0c (9_3)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	3.0	6.6
OpenGL	2.0	4.6
OpenCL	N/A	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	-	7.5

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.

ATI X1650 0.18

T400 9.40
+5122%

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.

ATI X1650 71

T400 3623
+5003%

Gaming performance

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

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.18	9.40
Recency	20 November 2007	6 May 2021
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	80 nm	12 nm

T400 has a 5122.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

The T400 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1650 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon X1650 is a desktop card while T400 is a workstation one.

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