ATI Radeon HD 4650 AGP vs GeForce 8400M GT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8400M GT with Radeon HD 4650 AGP, including specs and performance data.

8400M GT
2007
512 MB GDDR3, 14 Watt
0.16

ATI HD 4650 AGP outperforms 8400M GT by a whopping 206% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking14601275
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.870.78
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameG86RV730
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date9 May 2007 (18 years ago)10 September 2008 (16 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 cores16320
Core clock speed450 MHz600 MHz
Number of transistors210 million514 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)14 Watt48 Watt
Texture fill rate3.60019.20
Floating-point processing power0.0288 TFLOPS0.384 TFLOPS
ROPs48
TMUs832

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 x16AGP 8x
Widthno data1-slot

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 typeGDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount512 MB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed600 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth19.2 GB/s12.8 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model4.04.1
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.11.1
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
ATI HD 4650 AGP 0.49
+206%

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
ATI HD 4650 AGP 207
+214%

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
−200%
12−14
+200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
God of War 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
Valorant 24−27
−192%
70−75
+192%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 10−12
−173%
30−33
+173%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
God of War 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Valorant 24−27
−192%
70−75
+192%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 8−9
−200%
24−27
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−200%
9−10
+200%
God of War 4−5
−200%
12−14
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−200%
21−24
+200%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−180%
14−16
+180%
Valorant 24−27
−192%
70−75
+192%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−200%
45−50
+200%
Valorant 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−200%
6−7
+200%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.16 0.49
Recency 9 May 2007 10 September 2008
Chip lithography 80 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 14 Watt 48 Watt

8400M GT has 242.9% lower power consumption.

ATI HD 4650 AGP, on the other hand, has a 206.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and a 45.5% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 4650 AGP 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 Radeon HD 4650 AGP 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
ATI Radeon HD 4650 AGP
Radeon HD 4650 AGP

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
4.4 22 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4650 AGP 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 Radeon HD 4650 AGP, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.