GeForce Go 6100 vs 8400M G

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8400M G and GeForce Go 6100, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.


8400M G
2007
256 MB GDDR3, 10 Watt
0.25
+525%

8400M G outperforms Go 6100 by a whopping 525% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking14281554
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.93no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)no data
GPU code nameG86C51MV
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date9 May 2007 (18 years ago)1 February 2006 (20 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 cores83
Core clock speed400 MHz1 MHz
Boost clock speedno data425 MHz
Number of transistors210 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology80 nm110 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Wattno data
Texture fill rate3.200no data
Floating-point processing power0.0128 TFLOPSno data
ROPs4no data
TMUs8no data
L2 Cache16 KBno data

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 1.0 x16no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeGDDR3shared Memory
Maximum RAM amount256 MBno data
Memory bus width64 Bitno data
Memory clock speed400 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth6.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

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 outputsno data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)shared Memory
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.1-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

8400M G 0.25
+525%
Go 6100 0.04

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.

8400M G 105
+518%
Samples: 97
Go 6100 17
Samples: 88

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
Valorant 24−27
+8.7%
21−24
−8.7%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Valorant 24−27
+8.7%
21−24
−8.7%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+16.7%
6−7
−16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Valorant 24−27
+8.7%
21−24
−8.7%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4 0−1

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

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

  • in Fortnite, with 4K resolution and the Epic Preset, the 8400M G is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • 8400M G performs better in 16 tests (80%)
  • there's a draw in 4 tests (20%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.25 0.04
Recency 9 May 2007 1 February 2006
Chip lithography 80 nm 110 nm

8400M G has a 525% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 38% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce 8400M G is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 6100 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 22 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 19 votes

Rate GeForce Go 6100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 8400M G or GeForce Go 6100, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.