Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB vs GeForce 8400M GS

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1410not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.84no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)
GPU code nameG86Navi 31
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date9 May 2007 (18 years ago)13 April 2023 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$14.99 $2,499

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 cores164480
Core clock speed400 MHz1895 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2525 MHz
Number of transistors210 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)11 Watt281 Watt
Texture fill rate3.200707.0
Floating-point processing power0.0256 TFLOPS45.25 TFLOPS
ROPs4128
TMUs8280
Ray Tracing Coresno data70
L0 Cacheno data2.2 MB
L1 Cacheno data2 MB
L2 Cache16 KB6 MB
L3 Cacheno data96 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).

InterfaceMXM-IPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data280 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 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 typeDDR2GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB48 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed400 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth6.4 GB/s864.0 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 outputs3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1

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 Model4.06.8
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.1-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 9 May 2007 13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 48 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 11 Watt 281 Watt

8400M GS has 2454.5% lower power consumption.

PRO W7800 48 GB, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 15 years, a 19100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1500% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 8400M GS and Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 8400M GS is a notebook graphics card while Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB is a workstation one.

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.


NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS
GeForce 8400M GS
AMD Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB
Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB

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 43 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 5 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB 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 Radeon PRO W7800 48 GB, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.