HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) vs GeForce 8700M GT

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8700M GT and HD Graphics 400 (Braswell), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

8700M GT
2007
512 MB GDDR3, 29 Watt
0.32

HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) outperforms 8700M GT by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13111243
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.76no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Gen. 8 (2015−2016)
GPU code nameG84Braswell
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 June 2007 (17 years ago)1 April 2016 (8 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 cores3212
Core clock speed625 MHz320 MHz
Boost clock speedno data640 MHz
Number of transistors289 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology80 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)29 Wattno data
Texture fill rate10.00no data
Floating-point processing power0.08 TFLOPSno data
ROPs8no data
TMUs16no data

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-HEno data

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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount512 MBno data
Memory bus width128 Bit64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth25.6 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 data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.2
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.1-

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 HD4−5
−50%
6
+50%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
World of Tanks 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Valorant 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
High Preset

World of Tanks 0−1 0−1

This is how 8700M GT and HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) is 50% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) is 20% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) is ahead in 8 tests (25%)
  • there's a draw in 24 tests (75%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.32 0.45
Recency 1 June 2007 1 April 2016
Chip lithography 80 nm 14 nm

HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) has a 40.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.

The HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8700M GT in performance tests.


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 8700M GT
GeForce 8700M GT
Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)
HD Graphics 400 (Braswell)

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.


4.6 20 votes

Rate GeForce 8700M GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 243 votes

Rate HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) 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.