Radeon R5 A220 vs GeForce 9400

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1340not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.67no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameC79Caicos
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date18 June 2008 (17 years ago)2014 (11 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 cores16160
Core clock speed450 MHz775 MHz
Number of transistors314 million370 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)40 Watt35 Watt
Texture fill rate3.6006.200
Floating-point processing power0.0352 TFLOPSno data
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).

InterfacePCIPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1800 MBps
Memory bandwidthno data14.4 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video1x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.0
OpenGL3.34.4
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/AN/A

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 40 Watt 35 Watt

R5 A220 has a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 14.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 9400 and Radeon R5 A220. We've got no test results to judge.

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 9400
GeForce 9400
AMD Radeon R5 A220
Radeon R5 A220

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 15 votes

Rate GeForce 9400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 31 votes

Rate Radeon R5 A220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 9400 or Radeon R5 A220, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.