Radeon HD 8400 vs GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB

Place in performance ranking	202	1136
Place by popularity	27	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.30	0.08
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code name	GP106	Kabini
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	18 August 2016 (7 years ago)	23 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	no data
Current price	$1112 (5.6x MSRP)	$78

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1060 3 GB has 2775% better value for money than HD 8400.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1152	128
Core clock speed	1506 MHz	600 MHz
Boost clock speed	1708 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	4,400 million	1,178 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	123.0	3.200
Floating-point performance	3,935 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB and Radeon HD 8400 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	IGP
Length	250 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no 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 type	GDDR5	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	192 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	8008 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	192.2 GB/s	no data
Shared memory	no 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 Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	No outputs
HDMI	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	6.4	6.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	+	1.2.131
CUDA	6.1	no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 1060 3 GB 24.83
+3499%

HD 8400 0.69

GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB outperforms Radeon HD 8400 by 3499% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 1060 3 GB 9588
+3518%

HD 8400 265

GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB outperforms Radeon HD 8400 by 3518% in Passmark.

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD

350−400
+3082%

−3082%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

100−105

+3233%

3−4
−3233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−105 +3233%	3−4 −3233%
Cyberpunk 2077	100−105 +3233%	3−4 −3233%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 +3400%	1−2 −3400%
Hitman 3	70−75 +3400%	2−3 −3400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	400−450 +3233%	12−14 −3233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	250−260 +3471%	7−8 −3471%
Watch Dogs: Legion	350−400 +3400%	10−11 −3400%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−105 +3233%	3−4 −3233%
Cyberpunk 2077	100−105 +3233%	3−4 −3233%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 +3400%	1−2 −3400%
Hitman 3	70−75 +3400%	2−3 −3400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	400−450 +3233%	12−14 −3233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	250−260 +3471%	7−8 −3471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−105 +3233%	3−4 −3233%
Watch Dogs: Legion	350−400 +3400%	10−11 −3400%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	100−105 +3233%	3−4 −3233%
Cyberpunk 2077	100−105 +3233%	3−4 −3233%
Horizon Zero Dawn	400−450 +3233%	12−14 −3233%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	250−260 +3471%	7−8 −3471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−105 +3233%	3−4 −3233%
Watch Dogs: Legion	350−400 +3400%	10−11 −3400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	140−150 +3400%	4−5 −3400%
Cyberpunk 2077	35−40 +3400%	1−2 −3400%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +3400%	1−2 −3400%
Hitman 3	250−260 +3471%	7−8 −3471%
Horizon Zero Dawn	140−150 +3400%	4−5 −3400%