FireStream 9250 vs GeForce 8400M G

Place in the ranking	1348	777
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.86	1.39
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code name	G86	RV770
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	9 May 2007 (17 years ago)	16 June 2008 (16 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	8	800
Core clock speed	400 MHz	625 MHz
Number of transistors	210 million	956 million
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	3.200	25.00
Floating-point processing power	0.0128 TFLOPS	1 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	16
TMUs	8	40

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 2.0 x16
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 6-pin

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	GDDR3	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	1 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	400 MHz	993 MHz
Memory bandwidth	6.4 GB/s	63.55 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

1x DVI

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	4.0	4.1
OpenGL	3.3	3.3
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.1	-

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.

8400M G 0.27

FireStream 9250 3.03
+1022%

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.

8400M G 105

FireStream 9250 1164
+1009%

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −1000%	55−60 +1000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −983%	65−70 +983%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −1000%	55−60 +1000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 −983%	65−70 +983%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
World of Tanks	12−14 −983%	130−140 +983%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	8−9 −963%	85−90 +963%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −983%	65−70 +983%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −1000%	55−60 +1000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 −983%	65−70 +983%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

1−2

−900%

10−11
+900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 −1011%	100−105 +1011%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −950%	21−24 +950%
Valorant	4−5 −900%	40−45 +900%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −967%	160−170 +967%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −967%	160−170 +967%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −967%	160−170 +967%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Dota 2	14−16 −967%	160−170 +967%
Valorant	0−1	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.27	3.03
Recency	9 May 2007	16 June 2008
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	1 GB
Chip lithography	80 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	150 Watt

8400M G has 1400% lower power consumption.

FireStream 9250, on the other hand, has a 1022.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 45.5% more advanced lithography process.

The FireStream 9250 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M G in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8400M G is a notebook card while FireStream 9250 is a workstation one.

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