Radeon HD 8310E vs GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated1129
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data2.41
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameG96CKalindi
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date27 August 2008 (16 years ago)23 April 2013 (11 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 cores16128
Core clock speed550 MHz300 MHz
Number of transistors314 million1,178 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate4.4002.400
Floating-point processing power0.0448 TFLOPS0.0768 TFLOPS
ROPs44
TMUs88

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 2.0 x16IGP
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed400 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth12.8 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_0)
Shader Model4.06.3
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 August 2008 23 April 2013
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 25 Watt

HD 8310E has an age advantage of 4 years, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2 and Radeon HD 8310E. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2 is a desktop card while Radeon HD 8310E is a notebook 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 9400 GT Rev. 2
GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2
AMD Radeon HD 8310E
Radeon HD 8310E

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.


3.8 10 votes

Rate GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 30 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8310E 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.