GeForce 8400M GT vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and GeForce 8400M GT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
9.05
+5224%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) outperforms 8400M GT by a whopping 5224% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4811411
Place by popularity34not in top-100
Power efficiency41.360.83
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameVegaG86
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date7 January 2020 (4 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 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 cores51216
Core clock speedno data450 MHz
Boost clock speed2100 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data210 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt14 Watt
Texture fill rateno data3.600
Floating-point processing powerno data0.0288 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 1.0 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 typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data512 MB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data600 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data19.2 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 dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_111.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-1.1

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 HD22-0−1
1440p16-0−1
4K9-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 19
+850%
2−3
−850%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+633%
3−4
−633%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20 0−1
Battlefield 5 27−30 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Cyberpunk 2077 14
+600%
2−3
−600%
Far Cry 5 21−24 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+6000%
1−2
−6000%
Hitman 3 15
+275%
4−5
−275%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+538%
8−9
−538%
Metro Exodus 35 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 33 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 36
+800%
4−5
−800%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+114%
27−30
−114%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+633%
3−4
−633%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16 0−1
Battlefield 5 27−30 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Cyberpunk 2077 10
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry 5 21−24 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+6000%
1−2
−6000%
Hitman 3 15
+275%
4−5
−275%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+538%
8−9
−538%
Metro Exodus 25 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27
+575%
4−5
−575%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+178%
9−10
−178%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+114%
27−30
−114%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 21−24
+633%
3−4
−633%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+850%
2−3
−850%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+350%
2−3
−350%
Far Cry 5 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+6000%
1−2
−6000%
Hitman 3 14
+250%
4−5
−250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24
+200%
8−9
−200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 23
+475%
4−5
−475%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12
−133%
27−30
+133%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 11 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 5 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
Hitman 3 10
+66.7%
6−7
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 20
+900%
2−3
−900%
Metro Exodus 17 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 59
+5800%
1−2
−5800%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 13
+550%
2−3
−550%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40 0−1
Metro Exodus 7−8 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−12 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%

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

  • in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 900% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the 8400M GT is 133% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is ahead in 28 tests (97%)
  • 8400M GT is ahead in 1 test (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.05 0.17
Recency 7 January 2020 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 7 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 14 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 5223.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, and a 1042.9% more advanced lithography process.

8400M GT, on the other hand, has 7.1% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M GT 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 RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GT
GeForce 8400M GT

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.


3.8 1180 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 22 votes

Rate GeForce 8400M GT 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.