GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile vs 8400M GS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8400M GS and GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

8400M GS
2007, $15
256 MB DDR2, 11 Watt
0.27

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms 8400M GS by a whopping 6278% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1433357
Place by popularitynot in top-10040
Power efficiency1.9029.60
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameG86GA107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date9 May 2007 (19 years ago)17 December 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$14.99 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores162048
Core clock speed400 MHz1185 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1477 MHz
Number of transistors210 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology80 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)11 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate3.20094.53
Floating-point processing power0.0256 TFLOPS6.05 TFLOPS
ROPs432
TMUs864
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data32
L1 Cacheno data2.5 MB
L2 Cache16 KB2 MB

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
InterfaceMXM-IPCIe 3.0 x8

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 typeDDR2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed400 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth6.4 GB/s112.0 GB/s
Shared memory--
Resizable BAR-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

VR Readyno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.18.6
DLSS-+

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 HD0−142
1440p0−132
4K-0−128

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 47
Palworld 3−4
−1800%
57
+1800%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 42
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2300%
70−75
+2300%
Palworld 3−4
−1500%
48
+1500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−843%
65−70
+843%
Valorant 24−27
−440%
130−140
+440%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
−1585%
210−220
+1585%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 29
Dota 2 9−10
−1211%
118
+1211%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2300%
70−75
+2300%
Palworld 3−4
−1167%
38
+1167%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−843%
65−70
+843%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−1060%
58
+1060%
Valorant 24−27
−440%
130−140
+440%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 25
Dota 2 9−10
−1122%
110
+1122%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−2300%
70−75
+2300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−843%
65−70
+843%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−560%
33
+560%
Valorant 24−27
−440%
130−140
+440%

Full HD
Epic

Palworld 3−4
−1067%
35
+1067%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−1650%
35−40
+1650%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−5233%
160−170
+5233%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−4200%
40−45
+4200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−2500%
24−27
+2500%

1440p
Epic

Palworld 0−1 24−27

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−113%
30−35
+113%
Valorant 5−6
−1680%
85−90
+1680%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−1600%
16−18
+1600%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−800%
18−20
+800%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 74
+0%
74
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 25
+0%
25
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 67
+0%
67
+0%
Far Cry 5 59
+0%
59
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40
+0%
40
+0%
Far Cry 5 53
+0%
53
+0%
Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 68
+0%
68
+0%
Metro Exodus 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Far Cry 5 49
+0%
49
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 37
+0%
37
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Palworld 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Dota 2 34
+0%
34
+0%
Far Cry 5 18
+0%
18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%

4K
Epic

Palworld 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

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

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 2050 Mobile is 5233% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 2050 Mobile performs better in 26 tests (43%)
  • there's a draw in 34 tests (57%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.27 17.22
Recency 9 May 2007 17 December 2021
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 11 Watt 45 Watt

8400M GS has 309% lower power consumption.

RTX 2050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 6278% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 900% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M GS in performance tests.

Other comparisons

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 46 votes

Rate GeForce 8400M GS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 3373 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 8400M GS or GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.