GeForce 8400M GS vs GTX 280

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 280 with GeForce 8400M GS, including specs and performance data.

GTX 280
2008
1 GB GDDR3, 236 Watt
3.34
+1185%

GTX 280 outperforms 8400M GS by a whopping 1185% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7461365
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.12no data
Power efficiency0.971.62
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGT200G86
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date16 June 2008 (16 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$649 $14.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores24016
Core clock speed602 MHz400 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)236 Watt11 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate48.163.200
Floating-point processing power0.6221 TFLOPS0.0256 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs808

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 x16MXM-I
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount1 GB256 MB
Memory bus width512 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1107 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth141.7 GB/s6.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsHDTVDual Link DVINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

API and SDK 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
OpenGL2.13.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GTX 280 3.34
+1185%
8400M GS 0.26

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.

GTX 280 1285
+1185%
8400M GS 100

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 33 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.34 0.26
Recency 16 June 2008 9 May 2007
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 65 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 236 Watt 11 Watt

GTX 280 has a 1184.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 23.1% more advanced lithography process.

8400M GS, on the other hand, has 2045.5% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 280 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M GS in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 280 is a desktop card while GeForce 8400M GS is a notebook 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 GTX 280
GeForce GTX 280
NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS
GeForce 8400M GS

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.


3.6 109 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 280 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 41 vote

Rate GeForce 8400M GS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 280 or GeForce 8400M GS, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.