Radeon PRO W7700 vs GeForce 8400M G

Place in the ranking	1349	36
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	69.52
Power efficiency	1.86	21.47
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	G86	Navi 32
Market segment	Laptop	Workstation
Release date	9 May 2007 (17 years ago)	13 November 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$999

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 cores	8	3072
Core clock speed	400 MHz	1900 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2600 MHz
Number of transistors	210 million	28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	190 Watt
Texture fill rate	3.200	499.2
Floating-point processing power	0.0128 TFLOPS	31.95 TFLOPS
ROPs	4	96
TMUs	8	192
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	48

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).

Interface	PCIe 1.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	241 mm
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	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 type	GDDR3	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	16 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	400 MHz	2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth	6.4 GB/s	576.0 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 Connectors

No outputs

4x DisplayPort 2.1

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.7
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	1.1	-

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.

8400M G 0.27

PRO W7700 59.18
+21819%

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

PRO W7700 22747
+21564%

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 Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −21567%	1300−1350 +21567%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −19900%	400−450 +19900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −21567%	1300−1350 +21567%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −19900%	400−450 +19900%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −20900%	1050−1100 +20900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −21150%	850−900 +21150%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −21567%	1300−1350 +21567%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −19900%	400−450 +19900%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −21567%	1300−1350 +21567%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −20900%	1050−1100 +20900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 −21567%	1300−1350 +21567%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −21150%	850−900 +21150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −21150%	850−900 +21150%
World of Tanks	12−14 −21567%	2600−2650 +21567%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −21567%	1300−1350 +21567%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −19900%	400−450 +19900%
Far Cry 5	6−7 −21567%	1300−1350 +21567%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 −20900%	1050−1100 +20900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 −21567%	1300−1350 +21567%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

1−2

−20900%

210−220
+20900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	30−35 −21775%	7000−7050 +21775%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −21567%	650−700 +21567%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −21150%	850−900 +21150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −21150%	850−900 +21150%
Valorant	4−5 −21150%	850−900 +21150%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 −21567%	3250−3300 +21567%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −21567%	3250−3300 +21567%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	1−2 −20900%	210−220 +20900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −21567%	3250−3300 +21567%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −19900%	400−450 +19900%
Dota 2	14−16 −21567%	3250−3300 +21567%
Valorant	0−1	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.27	59.18
Recency	9 May 2007	13 November 2023
Maximum RAM amount	256 MB	16 GB
Chip lithography	80 nm	5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	10 Watt	190 Watt

8400M G has 1800% lower power consumption.

PRO W7700, on the other hand, has a 21818.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1500% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M G in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8400M G is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W7700 is a workstation one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.