UHD Graphics 32EU vs GeForce 9400 GT

VS

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)Generation 12.1 (2020−2021)
GPU code nameG96CTiger Lake GT1
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date27 August 2008 (16 years ago)2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$79.99 no data

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 cores16256
Core clock speed550 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1350 MHz
Number of transistors314 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt15 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate4.40021.60
Floating-point processing power0.0448 TFLOPS0.6912 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs816

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).

Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16Ring Bus
Length168 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI options+-

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 typeDDR2System Shared
Maximum RAM amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed400 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth12.8 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno data+

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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIPortable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 55 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 15 Watt

UHD Graphics 32EU has a 450% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 9400 GT and UHD Graphics 32EU. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 9400 GT is a desktop card while UHD Graphics 32EU 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
GeForce 9400 GT
Intel UHD Graphics 32EU
UHD Graphics 32EU

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.


3.2 491 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 4 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 32EU 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.