Quadro RTX 8000 vs Radeon HD 8400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8400 with Quadro RTX 8000, including specs and performance data.

HD 8400
2013
25 Watt
0.69

RTX 8000 outperforms HD 8400 by a whopping 7187% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking118060
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.02
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameKabiniTU102
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date23 May 2013 (11 years ago)13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$9,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1284608
Core clock speed600 MHz1395 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1770 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate3.200509.8
Floating-point performance0.1024 gflops16.31 gflops

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 typeno dataGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared48 GB
Memory bus widthno data384 Bit
Memory clock speedno data14000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data672.0 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 outputs4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan1.2.1311.2.131
CUDA-7.5

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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
RTX 8000 50.28
+7187%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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
RTX 8000 19401
+7221%

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 HD11
−7173%
800−850
+7173%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−6900%
210−220
+6900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−7150%
290−300
+7150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−6900%
210−220
+6900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−6900%
210−220
+6900%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−6900%
350−400
+6900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−7173%
800−850
+7173%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−6567%
400−450
+6567%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−7067%
2150−2200
+7067%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−7150%
290−300
+7150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−6900%
210−220
+6900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−6900%
210−220
+6900%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−6900%
350−400
+6900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−7173%
800−850
+7173%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−6567%
400−450
+6567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−6900%
700−750
+6900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−7067%
2150−2200
+7067%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−7150%
290−300
+7150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−6900%
210−220
+6900%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−6900%
210−220
+6900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−6900%
350−400
+6900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−7173%
800−850
+7173%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−6567%
400−450
+6567%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−6900%
700−750
+6900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−7067%
2150−2200
+7067%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Hitman 3 6−7
−6567%
400−450
+6567%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−6900%
210−220
+6900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−6900%
140−150
+6900%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−6900%
210−220
+6900%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−6900%
140−150
+6900%

This is how HD 8400 and RTX 8000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 8000 is 7173% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.69 50.28
Recency 23 May 2013 13 August 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 260 Watt

HD 8400 has 940% lower power consumption.

RTX 8000, on the other hand, has a 7187% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 8000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8400 is a notebook card while Quadro RTX 8000 is a 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.


AMD Radeon HD 8400
Radeon HD 8400
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 8000
Quadro RTX 8000

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
3.6 446 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 8000 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.