Recommended System Requirements | ||
---|---|---|
Game | GeForce 6150 SE nForce 430 | Radeon X1050 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 21221% | 7640% |
Assassins Creed: Valhalla | 19400% | 6979% |
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War | 18768% | 6749% |
Hitman 3 | 27636% | 9968% |
Grand Theft Auto VI | 29900% | 10790% |
FIFA 21 | 10655% | 3804% |
Far Cry 6 | 30749% | 11099% |
Genshin Impact | 21221% | 7640% |
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands | 30466% | 10996% |
Watch Dogs Legion | 20466% | 7366% |
In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon X1050 are massively better than the Nvidia GeForce 6150 SE nForce 430.
The Radeon X1050 was released less than a year after the 6150 SE, and so they are likely to have similar driver support for optimizing performance when running the latest games.
Both GPUs exhibit very poor performance, so rather than upgrading from one to the other you should consider looking at more powerful GPUs. Neither of these will be able to run the latest games in any playable way.
The 6150 SE has 128 MB more video memory than the Radeon X1050, so is likely to be slightly better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. However, the overall memory performance is about the same.
The Radeon X1050 has 5.3 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the 6150 SE, which means that the memory performance of the Radeon X1050 is marginally better than the 6150 SE.
The GeForce 6150 SE nForce 430 has 2 Shader Processing Units and the Radeon X1050 has 4. The two GPUs are based on different architectures, but deliver an equivalent shader performance. To compare, we must continue to look at the memory bandwidth, Texture and Pixel Rates. In this case, we sadly do not have enough data in this area to complete the comparison.
The Radeon X1050 requires 24 Watts to run but there is no entry for the 6150 SE. We would recommend a PSU with at least 300 Watts for the Radeon X1050, but we do not have a recommended PSU wattage for the 6150 SE.
Core Speed | 425 MHz | ![]() | vs | 400 MHz | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Boost Clock | - | vs | - | ||
Architecture | MCP61 | RV370 | |||
OC Potential | - | vs |
![]() | Fair | |
Driver Support | - | vs | - | ||
Release Date | 01 Jun 2006 | vs | ![]() | 07 Dec 2006 | |
GPU Link | GD Link | GD Link | |||
Approved | ![]() | ![]() | |||
Comparison |
Memory | N/A | ![]() | vs | 128 MB | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Memory Speed | - | vs | ![]() | 333 MHz | |
Memory Bus | 128 Bit | ![]() | vs | 64 Bit | |
Memory Type | DDR2 | ![]() | vs | ![]() | DDR2 |
Memory Bandwidth | - | vs | ![]() | 5.3GB/sec | |
L2 Cache | - | vs | - | ||
Delta Color Compression | no | vs | no | ||
Memory Performance | 0% | ![]() |
vs | ![]() |
0% |
Comparison |
Shader Processing Units | 2 | vs | ![]() | 4 | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Actual Shader Performance | 0% | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 0% |
Technology | - | vs | ![]() | 110nm | |
Texture Mapping Units | - | vs | ![]() | 4 | |
Texture Rate | - | vs | ![]() | 1.6 GTexel/s | |
Render Output Units | - | vs | ![]() | 4 | |
Pixel Rate | - | vs | ![]() | 1.6 GPixel/s | |
Comparison |
Max Digital Resolution (WxH) | 2560x1600 | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 2560x1600 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
VGA Connections | 1 | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 1 |
DVI Connections | 1 | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 1 |
HDMI Connections | 1 | ![]() | vs | 0 | |
DisplayPort Connections | - | vs | - | ||
Comparison |
Max Power | - | 24 Watts | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recommended PSU | - | 300 Watts & 18 Amps |
DirectX | 9.0c | ![]() | vs | ![]() | 9 |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Shader Model | 3.0 | ![]() | vs | 2.0 | |
Open GL | 1.5 | vs | ![]() | 2.0 | |
Open CL | - | vs | - | ||
Notebook GPU | no | no | |||
SLI/Crossfire | no | vs | no | ||
Dedicated | no | vs | ![]() | yes | |
Comparison |
Recommended Processor | - | - | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Recommended RAM | - | - | |||
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution | - | - |
Performance Value | ![]() |
---|
Recommended CPU | - | - | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Possible GPU Upgrades | N/A | N/A | |||
GPU Variants | - | - |