GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2 vs GTX 260 216

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGT200G96C
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date16 September 2008 (16 years ago)27 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$299 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 cores21616
Core clock speed576 MHz550 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate41.474.400
Floating-point processing power0.5365 TFLOPS0.0448 TFLOPS
ROPs284
TMUs728

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
Length267 mm168 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount896 MB512 MB
Memory bus width448 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/s12.8 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model4.04.0
OpenGL3.33.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA1.31.1

Pros & cons summary


Maximum RAM amount 896 MB 512 MB
Chip lithography 65 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 260 216 has a 75% higher maximum VRAM amount.

9400 GT Rev. 2, on the other hand, has a 18.2% more advanced lithography process, and 264% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 and GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2. 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 GTX 260 Core 216
GeForce GTX 260 Core 216
NVIDIA GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2
GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2

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.


4.3 12 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 10 votes

Rate GeForce 9400 GT Rev. 2 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.