ATI Radeon HD 3870 vs GeForce 9400M (G) / ION (LE)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9400M (G) / ION (LE) with Radeon HD 3870, including specs and performance data.

9400M (G) / ION (LE)
2008
12 Watt
0.29

HD 3870 outperforms 9400M (G) / ION (LE) by a whopping 355% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking13861060
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.05
Power efficiency1.860.96
Architectureno dataTeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameMCP79MXRV670
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date14 October 2008 (17 years ago)19 November 2007 (18 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$269

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 MHz777 MHz
Number of transistors282 Million666 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt106 Watt
Texture fill rateno data12.43
Floating-point processing powerno data0.4973 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data16
L2 Cacheno data256 KB

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data241 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-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 typeno dataGDDR4
Maximum RAM amountno data512 MB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1126 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data72.06 GB/s
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 data2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX10.010.1 (10_1)
Shader Modelno data4.1
OpenGLno data3.3 (full) 4.0 (partial)
OpenCLno dataN/A
Vulkan-N/A

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

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
Valorant 24−27
−323%
110−120
+323%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
−323%
55−60
+323%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Dota 2 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Valorant 24−27
−323%
110−120
+323%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Dota 2 9−10
−344%
40−45
+344%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−329%
30−33
+329%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−320%
21−24
+320%
Valorant 24−27
−323%
110−120
+323%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−300%
12−14
+300%

1440p
Ultra

Escape from Tarkov 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−329%
60−65
+329%
Valorant 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.29 1.32
Recency 14 October 2008 19 November 2007
Chip lithography 65 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 106 Watt

9400M (G) / ION (LE) has an age advantage of 10 months, and 783.3% lower power consumption.

ATI HD 3870, on the other hand, has a 355.2% higher aggregate performance score, and a 18.2% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 3870 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9400M (G) / ION (LE) in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 9400M (G) / ION (LE) is a notebook graphics card while Radeon HD 3870 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 9400M (G) / ION (LE)
GeForce 9400M (G) / ION (LE)
ATI Radeon HD 3870
Radeon HD 3870

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 38 votes

Rate GeForce 9400M (G) / ION (LE) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 185 votes

Rate Radeon HD 3870 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 9400M (G) / ION (LE) or Radeon HD 3870, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.