ATI Graphics Ultra + 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 ranking1176not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.89no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)no data
GPU code nameKalindiMach32
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date23 November 2013 (11 years ago)1 January 1992 (32 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 cores128no data
Core clock speed400 MHz10 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology28 nm800 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Wattno data
Texture fill rate3.200no data
Floating-point processing power0.1024 TFLOPSno data
ROPs41
TMUs8no data

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).

InterfaceIGPPCI
WidthIGP1-slot

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 SharedDRAM
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared10 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data80.0 MB/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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x VGA

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)None
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.6None
OpenCL2.0None
Vulkan1.2.131-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 November 2013 1 January 1992
Chip lithography 28 nm 800 nm

HD 8400 has an age advantage of 21 year, and a 2757.1% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8400 and Graphics Ultra +. 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
ATI Graphics Ultra +
Graphics Ultra +

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.


2.8 129 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Graphics Ultra 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.