UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) vs GeForce 8400M GS

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
8200M G 8200M G mGPU AMD 8200M G mGPU Intel 8400M G 8400M GS 8400M GT 8600M GS 8600M GT 8600M GT Mac Edition 8600M GT SLI 8700M GT 8700M GT SLI 8800M GTS 8800M GTX 8800M GTX SLI
VS
#ad 
Buy on Amazon
(Jasper Lake 16 EU) (Jasper Lake 24 EU) (Jasper Lake 32 EU) G1 G1 (Ice Lake 32 EU) G4 G7 P630 Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) Xe 750 32EUs Xe G4 48EUs

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8400M GS and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

8400M GS
2007, $15
256 MB DDR2, 11 Watt
0.25

Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) outperforms 8400M GS by a whopping 740% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Share:
8400M GS 8400M GS
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU)

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1421919
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.7516.13
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Gen. 11 (2021)
GPU code nameG86Gen. 11
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date9 May 2007 (18 years ago)11 January 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1624
Core clock speed400 MHz350 MHz
Boost clock speedno data800 MHz
Number of transistors210 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology80 nm10 nm
Power consumption (TDP)11 Watt4.8 - 10 Watt
Texture fill rate3.200no data
Floating-point processing power0.0256 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).

InterfaceMXM-Ino 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 typeDDR2no data
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

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12_1
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA1.1-

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 HD1−2
−1200%
13
+1200%

Cost per frame, $

1080p14.99no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Valorant 24−27
−60%
40−45
+60%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
−231%
40−45
+231%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Dota 2 9−10
−88.9%
17
+88.9%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−60%
8
+60%
Valorant 24−27
−60%
40−45
+60%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Dota 2 9−10
−77.8%
16
+77.8%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−267%
10−12
+267%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+25%
4
−25%
Valorant 24−27
−60%
40−45
+60%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−600%
21−24
+600%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Valorant 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how 8400M GS and UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is 1200% faster in 1080p

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

  • in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the 8400M GS is 25% faster.
  • in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is 900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • 8400M GS performs better in 1 test (2%)
  • UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) performs better in 29 tests (53%)
  • there's a draw in 25 tests (45%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 0.25 2.10
Recency 9 May 2007 11 January 2021
Chip lithography 80 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 11 Watt 4 Watt

UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) has a 740% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 700% more advanced lithography process, and 175% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M GS in performance tests.

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
Intel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU)
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU)
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

8400M GS GeForce 8400M GS
vs
8400M G GeForce 8400M G
UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU)
vs
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
8400M GS GeForce 8400M GS
vs
ATI HD 4270 Radeon HD 4270
8400M GS 8400M GS
vs
GRID M60-4A GRID M60-4A
8400M GS 8400M GS
vs
GRID M60-8Q GRID M60-8Q
8400M GS 8400M GS
vs
M5000 SE M5000 SE
8400M GS 8400M GS
vs
540 Mobile 540 Mobile
8400M GS 8400M GS
vs
UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs UHD Graphics Xe G4 48EUs
8400M GS 8400M GS
vs
A100 PCIe 80 GB A100 PCIe 80 GB
8400M GS 8400M GS
vs
UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
8400M GS 8400M GS
vs
UHD Graphics 64EUs (Alder Lake 12th Gen) UHD Graphics 64EUs (Alder Lake 12th Gen)
NVS 135M NVS 135M
vs
ATI Mobility HD 3410 Mobility HD 3410
ATI Mobility HD 2400 Mobility HD 2400
vs
RTX A5000 Max-Q RTX A5000 Max-Q

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
3.2 60 votes

Rate UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU) 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 UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 24 EU), agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.