GeForce 9650M GT vs Radeon HD 8400

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1173not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.92no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameKalindiG96C
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date23 November 2013 (11 years ago)19 August 2008 (16 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 cores12832
Core clock speed400 MHz550 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate3.2008.800
Floating-point processing power0.1024 TFLOPS0.0848 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs816

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfaceIGPMXM-II
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 SharedGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared256 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Maximum VGA resolutionno data1920x1200

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.34.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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
+93.4%
9650M GT 137

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.

HD 8400 2013
+54.1%
9650M GT 1306

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 November 2013 19 August 2008
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 23 Watt

HD 8400 has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

9650M GT, on the other hand, has 8.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8400 and GeForce 9650M GT. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8400 is a desktop card while GeForce 9650M GT 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.


AMD Radeon HD 8400
Radeon HD 8400
NVIDIA GeForce 9650M GT
GeForce 9650M GT

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.


2.8 128 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 7 votes

Rate GeForce 9650M GT 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.