Apple M1 Max 32-Core GPU vs GeForce 9400M GeForceBoost
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 June 2008 (17 years ago) | 10 November 2020 (5 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. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 24 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 1296 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 44 Watt |
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 type | no data | LPDDR5-6400 |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 512 Bit |
| Shared memory | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 3 June 2008 | 10 November 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 5 nm |
Apple M1 Max 32-Core GPU has an age advantage of 12 years, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce 9400M GeForceBoost and M1 Max 32-Core GPU. We've got no test results to judge.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
