T400 vs GeForce 320M

Place in the ranking	1215	466
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.63	21.70
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code name	C89	TU117
Market segment	Desktop	Workstation
Release date	1 April 2010 (14 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	48	384
Core clock speed	450 MHz	420 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1425 MHz
Number of transistors	486 million	4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	30 Watt
Texture fill rate	7.200	34.20
Floating-point processing power	0.0912 TFLOPS	1.094 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	16
TMUs	16	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 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Width	IGP	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	System Shared	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	2 GB
Memory bus width	System Shared	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	80 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

3x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_1)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.1	6.6
OpenGL	3.3	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.

GeForce 320M 0.54

T400 9.40
+1641%

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.

GeForce 320M 209

T400 3626
+1635%

Gaming performance

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

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD

−1567%

350−400
+1567%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−1567%

50−55
+1567%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −1525%	65−70 +1525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Hitman 3	5−6 −1600%	85−90 +1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −1600%	170−180 +1600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −1567%	100−105 +1567%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −1567%	500−550 +1567%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −1525%	65−70 +1525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Hitman 3	5−6 −1600%	85−90 +1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −1600%	170−180 +1600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −1567%	100−105 +1567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −1600%	170−180 +1600%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −1567%	500−550 +1567%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	4−5 −1525%	65−70 +1525%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Hitman 3	5−6 −1600%	85−90 +1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn	10−11 −1600%	170−180 +1600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7 −1567%	100−105 +1567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −1600%	170−180 +1600%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−33 −1567%	500−550 +1567%

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

−1500%

16−18
+1500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Hitman 3	6−7 −1567%	100−105 +1567%
Horizon Zero Dawn	3−4 −1567%	50−55 +1567%
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−1567%

50−55
+1567%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −1500%	16−18 +1500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−1400%

30−33
+1400%

This is how GeForce 320M and T400 compete in popular games:

T400 is 1567% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.54	9.40
Recency	1 April 2010	6 May 2021
Chip lithography	40 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	23 Watt	30 Watt

GeForce 320M has 30.4% lower power consumption.

T400, on the other hand, has a 1640.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, and a 233.3% more advanced lithography process.

The T400 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 320M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 320M 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.