AeroBox GPU vs GeForce 9400M G

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)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameC79Kryptos
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date15 October 2008 (16 years ago)13 March 2020 (4 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 cores16896
Core clock speed450 MHz935 MHz
Boost clock speedno data985 MHz
Number of transistors314 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm16 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate3.60055.16
Floating-point processing power0.0352 TFLOPS1.765 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs856

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
WidthIGPno 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 typeSystem SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared8 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1066 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data68.22 GB/s

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 (11_1)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.3N/A
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 October 2008 13 March 2020
Chip lithography 65 nm 16 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 100 Watt

9400M G has 733.3% lower power consumption.

AeroBox GPU, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 11 years, and a 306.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 9400M G and AeroBox GPU. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 9400M G is a desktop card while AeroBox GPU 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 9400M G
GeForce 9400M G
AMD AeroBox GPU
AeroBox GPU

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.


3.6 5 votes

Rate GeForce 9400M G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 679 votes

Rate AeroBox GPU 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.