GeForce 8600 GS vs Radeon HD 8400

Place in the ranking	1179	1369
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.90	0.35
Architecture	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Kalindi	G84
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	23 November 2013 (11 years ago)	17 April 2007 (17 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 cores	128	16
Core clock speed	400 MHz	540 MHz
Number of transistors	1,178 million	289 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt	47 Watt
Texture fill rate	3.200	4.320
Floating-point processing power	0.1024 TFLOPS	0.03808 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	8
TMUs	8	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).

Interface	IGP	PCIe 1.0 x16
Width	IGP	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	System Shared	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	System Shared	512 MB
Memory bus width	System Shared	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	System Shared	400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	12.8 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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.3	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	3.3
OpenCL	2.0	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	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.

HD 8400 0.69
+188%

8600 GS 0.24

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.

HD 8400 265
+191%

8600 GS 91

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 HD

10
+233%

3−4

−233%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	3 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry 5	5 +400%	1−2 −400%
Fortnite	1−2	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%
World of Tanks	19 +217%	6−7 −217%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	8 +300%	2−3 −300%
Far Cry 5	8−9 +300%	2−3 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 +200%	2−3 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
World of Tanks	2−3	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +200%	3−4 −200%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	4−5 +300%	1−2 −300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3	0−1
Valorant	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	2−3	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Dota 2	14−16 +200%	5−6 −200%
Valorant	1−2	0−1

This is how HD 8400 and 8600 GS compete in popular games:

HD 8400 is 233% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.69	0.24
Recency	23 November 2013	17 April 2007
Chip lithography	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	25 Watt	47 Watt

HD 8400 has a 187.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 88% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 8400 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8600 GS in performance tests.

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