GeForce 8400 GS vs GTX 880M

Place in the ranking	453	1254
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	5.64	0.70
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GK104	G86
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	12 March 2014 (10 years ago)	17 April 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$29.99

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	1536	16
Core clock speed	954 MHz	459 MHz
Boost clock speed	993 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	3,540 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	122 Watt	40 Watt
Texture fill rate	127.1	3.672
Floating-point processing power	3.05 TFLOPS	0.02938 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	4
TMUs	128	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	large	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 1.0 x16
Length	no data	170 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
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 type	GDDR5	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	256 MB
Standard memory configuration	GDDR5	no data
Standard memory config per GPU	no data	256 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 2500 MHz	400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	160.0 GB/s	6.4 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
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.

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	2.1
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.

GTX 880M 9.89
+2373%

8400 GS 0.40

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.

GTX 880M 3817
+2363%

8400 GS 155

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	135 +2600%	5−6 −2600%
Full HD	56 +2700%	2−3 −2700%
4K	23	0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

15.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16	0−1
Battlefield 5	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	0−1
Far Cry 5	21−24	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +2600%	1−2 −2600%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +3200%	2−3 −3200%
Hitman 3	18−20	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +2600%	2−3 −2600%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +2600%	1−2 −2600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +3100%	1−2 −3100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +3050%	2−3 −3050%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16	0−1
Battlefield 5	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	0−1
Far Cry 5	21−24	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	27−30 +2600%	1−2 −2600%
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +3200%	2−3 −3200%
Hitman 3	18−20	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +2600%	2−3 −2600%
Metro Exodus	30−35 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +2600%	1−2 −2600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +3100%	1−2 −3100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	102 +2450%	4−5 −2450%
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +3050%	2−3 −3050%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	14−16	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20−22	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	0−1
Far Cry 5	21−24	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	65−70 +3200%	2−3 −3200%
Hitman 3	18−20	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +2600%	2−3 −2600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	30−35 +3100%	1−2 −3100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	19	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +3050%	2−3 −3050%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

27−30
+2600%

1−2

−2600%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	10−11	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−11	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−12	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +4300%	1−2 −4300%
Hitman 3	12−14	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	20−22	0−1
Metro Exodus	14−16	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	9−10	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	60−65 +3000%	2−3 −3000%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

16−18

0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	7−8	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	40−45 +4100%	1−2 −4100%
Metro Exodus	8−9	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	7−8	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	12−14	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	6−7	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

0−1

This is how GTX 880M and 8400 GS compete in popular games:

GTX 880M is 2600% faster in 900p
GTX 880M is 2700% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.89	0.40
Recency	12 March 2014	17 April 2007
Maximum RAM amount	8 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	122 Watt	40 Watt

GTX 880M has a 2372.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

8400 GS, on the other hand, has 205% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 880M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400 GS in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 880M is a notebook card while GeForce 8400 GS is a desktop one.

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