Radeon RX 6750 XT vs HD 8400

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8400 and Radeon RX 6750 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

HD 8400
2013
25 Watt
0.69

RX 6750 XT outperforms HD 8400 by a whopping 7712% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking116847
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data51.66
Power efficiency1.9214.97
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameKalindiNavi 22
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date23 November 2013 (10 years ago)3 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$549

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores1282560
Core clock speed400 MHz2150 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2600 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate3.200416.0
Floating-point processing power0.1024 TFLOPS13.31 TFLOPS
ROPs464
TMUs8160
Ray Tracing Coresno data40

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 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
WidthIGP2-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 typeSystem SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared12 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared192 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared2250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data432.0 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 outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

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
RX 6750 XT 53.90
+7712%

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
RX 6750 XT 20800
+7749%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 8400 614
RX 6750 XT 48327
+7771%

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
RX 6750 XT 104004
+5067%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 8400 401
RX 6750 XT 37609
+9279%

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
RX 6750 XT 170993
+5831%

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

HD 8400 36156
RX 6750 XT 529598
+1365%

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 HD9
−1756%
167
+1756%
1440p1−2
−9100%
92
+9100%
4K0−150

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−5400%
165
+5400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−2700%
110−120
+2700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3367%
100−110
+3367%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−4133%
127
+4133%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−12900%
130−140
+12900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−2160%
110−120
+2160%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−1791%
200−210
+1791%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 110−120
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−3433%
210−220
+3433%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−380%
140−150
+380%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−2700%
110−120
+2700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3367%
100−110
+3367%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3533%
109
+3533%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−12900%
130−140
+12900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−2160%
110−120
+2160%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−1791%
200−210
+1791%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 110−120
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−4967%
304
+4967%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−1020%
110−120
+1020%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−380%
140−150
+380%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−2700%
110−120
+2700%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−3367%
100−110
+3367%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3167%
98
+3167%
Hitman 3 5−6
−2160%
110−120
+2160%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−1809%
210
+1809%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−4233%
260
+4233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−1250%
135
+1250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−227%
98
+227%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 110−120

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−8200%
80−85
+8200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 60−65
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−5900%
60
+5900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−6200%
60−65
+6200%
Hitman 3 6−7
−1150%
75−80
+1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−5167%
158
+5167%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−11100%
220−230
+11100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−2967%
90−95
+2967%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 50−55

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−3900%
40−45
+3900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 35−40

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−2500%
50−55
+2500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Battlefield 5 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Metro Exodus 126
+0%
126
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 186
+0%
186
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Hitman 3 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Metro Exodus 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 79
+0%
79
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
+0%
26
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 99
+0%
99
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 41
+0%
41
+0%

This is how HD 8400 and RX 6750 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6750 XT is 1756% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6750 XT is 9100% faster in 1440p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 6750 XT is 12900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX 6750 XT is ahead in 35 tests (53%)
  • there's a draw in 31 test (47%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.69 53.90
Recency 23 November 2013 3 March 2022
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 250 Watt

HD 8400 has 900% lower power consumption.

RX 6750 XT, on the other hand, has a 7711.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 6750 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8400 in performance tests.


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
AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT
Radeon RX 6750 XT

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.


2.8 127 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 2462 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6750 XT 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.