Dark mode
United Kingdom
Catalog   /   Computing   /   Components   /   Graphics Cards

Comparison Asus Radeon RX 6400 Phoenix vs MSI Radeon RX 6400 AERO ITX 4G

Add to comparison
Asus Radeon RX 6400 Phoenix
MSI Radeon RX 6400 AERO ITX 4G
Asus Radeon RX 6400 PhoenixMSI Radeon RX 6400 AERO ITX 4G
Compare prices 2
from £151.21 
Outdated Product
TOP sellers
InterfacePCI-E v4.0PCI-E v4.0
GPU
GPU modelAMD Radeon RX 6400AMD Radeon RX 6400
ArchitectureBig Navi (RDNA 2)Big Navi (RDNA 2)
Memory size4 GB4 GB
Memory typeGDDR6GDDR6
Memory bus64 bit64 bit
GPU clock speed2321 MHz2321 MHz
Memory clock16000 MHz16000 MHz
Lithography6 nm6 nm
Max. resolution7680x4320 px
Passmark G3D Mark7324 score(s)7324 score(s)
Connections
HDMI11
HDMI versionv.2.1v.2.1
DisplayPort11
DisplayPort versionv.1.4av.1.4a
Software
DirectX12 Ultimate12 Ultimate
OpenGL4.64.6
Stream processors768768
General
Monitors connection22
Coolingactive (fan)active (fan)
Fans1 pc1 pc
Power consumption55 W53 W
Minimum PSU recommendation500 W350 W
Number of slots22
Length196 mm172 mm
Added to E-Catalogapril 2022april 2022

Max. resolution

The maximum resolution supported by the graphics card — that is, the largest image size (in pixels) that it can display on an external screen.

The higher the resolution, the clearer and better the picture is. On the other hand, with an increase in the number of pixels, the requirements for computing power and, accordingly, the cost of a graphics card increase. In addition, do not forget that you can only appreciate the full benefits of high resolutions on monitors with the appropriate characteristics. On the other hand, in the graphics settings, you can set lower resolutions than the maximum; and a good resolution margin means a good overall performance margin.

As for specific values, the actual minimum for modern video cards is 1600x1200, but higher rates are much more common — up to Ultra HD 4K and Ultra HD 8K.

Power consumption

Maximum power consumed by the graphics card during operation. This parameter is important for calculating the total power consumed by the entire system and selecting a power supply that provides the appropriate power.

Minimum PSU recommendation

The smallest power supply recommended for a computer with this graphics card.

This parameter, usually, is much higher than the power consumption of the graphics card itself. This is natural — after all, the PSU must provide electricity to the entire system, not just the video adapter. At the same time, the higher the power of the graphics card, the inevitably higher the power consumption of the PC as a whole. Moreover, this is due not only to the “voracity” of the graphics adapter itself, but also to the consumption of other PC components: a high-end graphics card, usually, is combined with an equally powerful (and energy-intensive) system.

With this in mind, manufacturers indicate the minimum recommended power supply. Of course, such recommendations are not mandatory; however, when using a PSU with a power lower than the recommended one, the probability of malfunctions increases significantly — to the point that even a very limited system may simply “not start”.

Length

The total length of the graphics card.

In this case, the length means the size of the device from the plate with connectors (which is attached to the back wall of the system unit) to the opposite side. The plate itself and the outwardly protruding connectors are usually not taken into account.

Data on the length of the graphics card is needed primarily in order to assess whether there is enough space for it in a particular case. In addition, longer boards, usually, have more advanced characteristics (although there is no hard dependence here, and video adapters of similar class may have different lengths). As for specific values, the most compact solutions nowadays have a size of 150 – 200 mm or less ; an indicator of 200 – 250 mm can still be considered relatively small, 250 – 290 mm — medium, and many models (mostly advanced) have a length of more than 290 mm.
MSI Radeon RX 6400 AERO ITX 4G often compared