GeForce 8400M GS vs GT 745M

Place in the ranking	791	1339
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	4.40	1.78
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GK107	G86
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 April 2013 (11 years ago)	9 May 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$14.99

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 cores	384	16
Core clock speed	549 MHz	400 MHz
Number of transistors	1,270 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	11 Watt
Texture fill rate	17.57	3.200
Floating-point processing power	0.4216 TFLOPS	0.0256 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	32	8

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 size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-I

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 type	GDDR5	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	256 MB
Standard memory configuration	DDR3/GDDR5	no data
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	1000 MHz	400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	64 GB/s	6.4 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 Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP content protection	+	-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	+	-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	+	-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Blu-Ray 3D Support	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	+	1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GT 745M 2.84
+914%

8400M GS 0.28

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GT 745M 1095
+905%

8400M GS 109

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:

900p	33 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Full HD	29 +1350%	2−3 −1350%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

7.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

6−7
+200%

2−3

−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Hitman 3	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +175%	8−9 −175%
Metro Exodus	3−4	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +35.7%	27−30 −35.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Hitman 3	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +175%	8−9 −175%
Metro Exodus	3−4	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +55.6%	9−10 −55.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +35.7%	27−30 −35.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
Hitman 3	8−9 +100%	4−5 −100%
Horizon Zero Dawn	21−24 +175%	8−9 −175%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +55.6%	9−10 −55.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +35.7%	27−30 −35.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

7−8

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	5−6	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Hitman 3	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 +250%	2−3 −250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	16−18 +1600%	1−2 −1600%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7
+200%

2−3

−200%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+100%

2−3

−100%

This is how GT 745M and 8400M GS compete in popular games:

GT 745M is 1000% faster in 900p
GT 745M is 1350% faster in 1080p

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

in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 745M is 250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GT 745M surpassed 8400M GS in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.84	0.28
Recency	1 April 2013	9 May 2007
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	45 Watt	11 Watt

GT 745M has a 914.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

8400M GS, on the other hand, has 309.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 745M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M GS in performance tests.

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