Radeon 780M vs NVS 5400M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared NVS 5400M with Radeon 780M, including specs and performance data.

NVS 5400M
2012
2 GB GDDR3, 35 Watt
1.62

780M outperforms NVS 5400M by a whopping 1028% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking959305
Place by popularitynot in top-10048
Power efficiency3.1983.89
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameGF108Hawx Point
Market segmentMobile workstationLaptop
Release date1 June 2012 (12 years ago)6 December 2023 (1 year 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 cores96768
Core clock speed660 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2700 MHz
Number of transistors585 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate10.56129.6
Floating-point processing power0.2534 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs1648
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 sizemedium sizedno data
InterfaceMXMPCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth28.8 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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

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.

NVS 5400M 1.62
Radeon 780M 18.28
+1028%

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.

NVS 5400M 624
Radeon 780M 7029
+1026%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

NVS 5400M 1119
Radeon 780M 12785
+1043%

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

NVS 5400M 5198
Radeon 780M 41622
+701%

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:

Full HD14
−150%
35
+150%
1440p1−2
−1600%
17
+1600%
4K1−2
−1300%
14
+1300%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−256%
32
+256%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−875%
39
+875%
Elden Ring 1−2
−3600%
37
+3600%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−2850%
55−60
+2850%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−189%
26
+189%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−275%
15
+275%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−622%
65
+622%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−4300%
44
+4300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−514%
40−45
+514%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−2850%
55−60
+2850%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−178%
25
+178%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−200%
12
+200%
Dota 2 2−3
−1350%
29
+1350%
Elden Ring 1−2
−4100%
42
+4100%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−167%
32
+167%
Fortnite 7−8
−1300%
95−100
+1300%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−500%
54
+500%
Grand Theft Auto V 2−3
−2150%
45
+2150%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−3100%
32
+3100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−641%
120−130
+641%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−514%
40−45
+514%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
−613%
55−60
+613%
World of Tanks 30−35
−567%
220−230
+567%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
−2850%
55−60
+2850%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−256%
30−35
+256%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
−200%
12
+200%
Dota 2 2−3
−3150%
65−70
+3150%
Far Cry 5 12−14
−425%
60−65
+425%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
−411%
46
+411%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
−641%
120−130
+641%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 0−1 30−33
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
−1560%
160−170
+1560%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
World of Tanks 10−11
−1150%
120−130
+1150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−66.7%
14−16
+66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−600%
14−16
+600%
Far Cry 5 5−6
−860%
45−50
+860%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−567%
20
+567%
Valorant 7−8
−571%
45−50
+571%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
−31.3%
21
+31.3%
Elden Ring 0−1 12−14
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−40%
21
+40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
−1275%
55−60
+1275%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−40%
21
+40%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−1700%
18−20
+1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Dota 2 16−18
−93.8%
30−35
+93.8%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2200%
21−24
+2200%
Valorant 2−3
−950%
21−24
+950%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 19
+0%
19
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 32
+0%
32
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 17
+0%
17
+0%

This is how NVS 5400M and Radeon 780M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 780M is 150% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 780M is 1600% faster in 1440p
  • Radeon 780M is 1300% faster in 4K

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

  • in Metro Exodus, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 780M is 4300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Radeon 780M is ahead in 48 tests (79%)
  • there's a draw in 13 tests (21%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.62 18.28
Recency 1 June 2012 6 December 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 780M has a 1028.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 900% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 780M is our recommended choice as it beats the NVS 5400M in performance tests.

Be aware that NVS 5400M is a mobile workstation card while Radeon 780M is a mobile workstation 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 NVS 5400M
NVS 5400M
AMD Radeon 780M
Radeon 780M

Other comparisons

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.


3.7 47 votes

Rate NVS 5400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1629 votes

Rate Radeon 780M 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.