ATI Radeon IGP 320M vs GeForce 8400M GT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8400M GT and Radeon IGP 320M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

8400M GT
2007
512 MB GDDR3, 14 Watt
0.15
+1400%

8400M GT outperforms ATI IGP 320M by a whopping 1400% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking14281541
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.85no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameG86RS100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date9 May 2007 (17 years ago)5 October 2002 (22 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 cores162
Core clock speed450 MHz160 MHz
Boost clock speedno data160 MHz
Number of transistors210 million30 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm180 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Wattno data
Texture fill rate3.6000.16
Floating-point processing power0.0288 TFLOPSno data
ROPs41
TMUs81

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16AGP 4x
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed600 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth19.2 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)7.0
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.31.4
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.1-

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.

8400M GT 0.15
+1400%
ATI IGP 320M 0.01

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 GT 66
+2100%
ATI IGP 320M 3

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

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Valorant 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+4.2%
24−27
−4.2%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the 8400M GT is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • 8400M GT is ahead in 10 tests (56%)
  • there's a draw in 8 tests (44%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.15 0.01
Recency 9 May 2007 5 October 2002
Chip lithography 80 nm 180 nm

8400M GT has a 1400% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 125% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce 8400M GT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon IGP 320M in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GT
GeForce 8400M GT
ATI Radeon IGP 320M
Radeon IGP 320M

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


2.5 22 votes

Rate GeForce 8400M GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 17 votes

Rate Radeon IGP 320M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 8400M GT or Radeon IGP 320M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.