GeForce 9400M G vs GT 630

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking919not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.08no data
Power efficiency1.86no data
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGF108C79
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date15 May 2012 (12 years ago)15 October 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99.99 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores9616
Core clock speed810 MHz450 MHz
Number of transistors585 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate12.963.600
Floating-point processing power0.311 TFLOPS0.0352 TFLOPS
ROPs44
TMUs168

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 2.0 x16
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth28.8 GB/sno data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGANo outputs
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.1-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

GT 630 676
+909%
9400M G 67

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 May 2012 15 October 2008
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 12 Watt

GT 630 has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 62.5% more advanced lithography process.

9400M G, on the other hand, has 441.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GT 630 and GeForce 9400M G. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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 GT 630
GeForce GT 630
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M G
GeForce 9400M G

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.1 2700 votes

Rate GeForce GT 630 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.