GeForce G210M vs Radeon HD 8400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1180not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.63no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameKalindiGT218
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date23 November 2013 (10 years ago)15 June 2009 (15 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 cores12816
CUDA coresno data16
Core clock speed400 MHz625 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rate3.2005.000
Floating-point processing power0.1024 TFLOPS0.048 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data72
ROPs44
TMUs88

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).

Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
InterfaceIGPPCIe 2.0 x16

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 SharedUp to 1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem SharedUp to 500 (DDR2), Up to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidthno data12.8 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 outputsDual Link DVIDisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVIVGA
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.34.1
OpenGL4.62.1
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 266
+129%
GeForce G210M 116

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
+97.2%
GeForce G210M 1021

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD 8400 2883
+59.7%
GeForce G210M 1805

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 November 2013 15 June 2009
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 14 Watt

HD 8400 has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce G210M, on the other hand, has 78.6% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8400 and GeForce G210M. We've got no test results to judge.


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 G210M
GeForce G210M

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.


2.8 126 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 75 votes

Rate GeForce G210M 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.