Radeon Pro V320 MxGPU vs GeForce 8400M GT

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameG86Vega 10
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date9 May 2007 (17 years ago)29 June 2017 (7 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 cores163584
Core clock speed450 MHz852 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1000 MHz
Number of transistors210 million12,500 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt230 Watt
Texture fill rate3.600224.0
Floating-point processing power0.0288 TFLOPS7.168 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs8224

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 8-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 typeGDDR3HBM2
Maximum RAM amount512 MB16 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit2048 Bit
Memory clock speed600 MHz945 MHz
Memory bandwidth19.2 GB/s483.8 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.1.125
CUDA1.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 May 2007 29 June 2017
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 16 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 230 Watt

8400M GT has 1542.9% lower power consumption.

Pro V320 MxGPU, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 10 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 8400M GT and Radeon Pro V320 MxGPU. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 8400M GT is a notebook card while Radeon Pro V320 MxGPU is a workstation one.


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

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
AMD Radeon Pro V320 MxGPU
Radeon Pro V320 MxGPU

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon Pro V320 MxGPU on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.