GeForce 8400 vs Radeon R7 250E

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking665not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.13no data
Power efficiency5.51no data
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameCape VerdeG98
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date20 December 2013 (10 years ago)4 December 2007 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 $69.78

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 cores5128
Core clock speed800 MHz540 MHz
Number of transistors1,500 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate25.604.320
Floating-point processing power0.8192 TFLOPS0.0208 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs328

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length168 mmno data
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 typeGDDR5DDR2
Maximum RAM amount1 GB256 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz500 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s8 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-1.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 20 December 2013 4 December 2007
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 25 Watt

R7 250E has an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 8400, on the other hand, has 120% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 250E and GeForce 8400. 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 R7 250E
Radeon R7 250E
NVIDIA GeForce 8400
GeForce 8400

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.


4 23 votes

Rate Radeon R7 250E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 26 votes

Rate GeForce 8400 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.