GeForce 8200 vs 8400M GT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8400M GT with GeForce 8200, including specs and performance data.

8400M GT
2007
512 MB GDDR3, 14 Watt
0.16

8200 outperforms 8400M GT by a whopping 144% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking14631308
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.870.74
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameG86C78
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date9 May 2007 (18 years ago)6 May 2008 (17 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 cores1616
Core clock speed450 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors210 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate3.6004.000
Floating-point processing power0.0288 TFLOPS0.0384 TFLOPS
ROPs44
TMUs88

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 x16PCI
Widthno dataIGP

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed600 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth19.2 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model4.04.0
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.1-

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.

8400M GT 0.16
GeForce 8200 0.39
+144%

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 GT 66
GeForce 8200 163
+147%

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 0−1 0−1
God of War 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
God of War 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
Valorant 24−27
−129%
55−60
+129%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
−118%
24−27
+118%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
God of War 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Valorant 24−27
−129%
55−60
+129%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 8−9
−125%
18−20
+125%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−133%
7−8
+133%
God of War 4−5
−125%
9−10
+125%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−129%
16−18
+129%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−140%
12−14
+140%
Valorant 24−27
−129%
55−60
+129%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−133%
35−40
+133%
Valorant 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Ultra Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.16 0.39
Recency 9 May 2007 6 May 2008
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 40 Watt

8400M GT has 185.7% lower power consumption.

GeForce 8200, on the other hand, has a 143.8% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 11 months.

The GeForce 8200 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M GT in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8400M GT is a notebook graphics card while GeForce 8200 is a desktop 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 GT
GeForce 8400M GT
NVIDIA GeForce 8200
GeForce 8200

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.


2.5 22 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 65 votes

Rate GeForce 8200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 8400M GT or GeForce 8200, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.