Radeon R7 250XE vs GeForce 9400M G

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1344not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency2.24no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameC79Cape Verde
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date15 October 2008 (17 years ago)21 August 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 cores16640
Core clock speed450 MHz860 MHz
Number of transistors314 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate3.60034.40
Floating-point processing power0.0352 TFLOPS1.101 TFLOPS
ROPs416
TMUs840
L1 Cacheno data160 KB
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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Widthno data1-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 SharedGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1125 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data72 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 outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA
HDMI-+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCLN/A1.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 October 2008 21 August 2014
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 80 Watt

9400M G has 566.7% lower power consumption.

R7 250XE, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 9400M G and Radeon R7 250XE. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 9400M G is a notebook graphics card while Radeon R7 250XE 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
GeForce 9400M G
AMD Radeon R7 250XE
Radeon R7 250XE

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.


3.5 6 votes

Rate GeForce 9400M G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 4 votes

Rate Radeon R7 250XE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 9400M G or Radeon R7 250XE, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.