Quadro K500M vs GeForce 8400M GS
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 8400M GS with Quadro K500M, including specs and performance data.
K500M outperforms 8400M GS by a whopping 342% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1397 | 1093 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.80 | 2.50 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | G86 | GK107 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Mobile workstation |
| Release date | 9 May 2007 (18 years ago) | 1 June 2012 (13 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 16 | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 400 MHz | 850 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 210 million | 1,270 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 80 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 11 Watt | 35 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 3.200 | 13.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.0256 TFLOPS | 0.3264 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 8 |
| TMUs | 8 | 16 |
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 size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | MXM-I | MXM-A (3.0) |
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 | DDR2 | DDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 400 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 6.4 GB/s | 12.8 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | N/A | + |
| 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.
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.
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
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−28%
|
30−35
+28%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−108%
|
27−30
+108%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−77.8%
|
16−18
+77.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−28%
|
30−35
+28%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Dota 2 | 9−10
−77.8%
|
16−18
+77.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−133%
|
7−8
+133%
|
| God of War | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
−28.6%
|
9−10
+28.6%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−40%
|
7−8
+40%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
−28%
|
30−35
+28%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−300%
|
12−14
+300%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
−200%
|
6−7
+200%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Valorant | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| God of War | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the Quadro K500M is 300% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Quadro K500M performs better in 27 tests (63%)
- there's a draw in 16 tests (37%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.26 | 1.15 |
| Recency | 9 May 2007 | 1 June 2012 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 256 MB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 80 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 11 Watt | 35 Watt |
8400M GS has 218.2% lower power consumption.
Quadro K500M, on the other hand, has a 342.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Quadro K500M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M GS in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 8400M GS is a notebook graphics card while Quadro K500M is a mobile workstation one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
