GeForce 8400M GS vs GTX 960M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 960M and GeForce 8400M GS, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 960M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
8.62
+3215%

GTX 960M outperforms 8400M GS by a whopping 3215% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5001365
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency8.051.66
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGM107G86
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$14.99

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 cores64016
Core clock speed1096 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed1176 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,870 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt11 Watt
Texture fill rate47.043.200
Floating-point processing power1.505 TFLOPS0.0256 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs408

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).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)MXM-I
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 typeGDDR5DDR2
Maximum RAM amount4 GB256 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed2500 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
BatteryBoost+-
Ansel+no data

API and SDK 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
OpenGL4.53.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/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 960M 8.62
+3215%
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 960M 3368
+3268%
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.

Average FPS across all PC games

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

900p95
+4650%
2−3
−4650%
Full HD35
+3400%
1−2
−3400%
1440p15-0−1
4K14-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data14.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 23 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+1033%
3−4
−1033%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24 0−1
Metro Exodus 27 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+500%
4−5
−500%
Valorant 30−35 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 25 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Dota 2 21 0−1
Far Cry 5 35−40
+429%
7−8
−429%
Fortnite 36
+3500%
1−2
−3500%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+1033%
3−4
−1033%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 31 0−1
Metro Exodus 17 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 99
+1550%
6−7
−1550%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+500%
4−5
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+600%
4−5
−600%
Valorant 30−35 0−1
World of Tanks 130−140
+983%
12−14
−983%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Dota 2 30−35 0−1
Far Cry 5 35−40
+429%
7−8
−429%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+1033%
3−4
−1033%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20
+233%
6−7
−233%
Valorant 30−35 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 10−12 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+4100%
1−2
−4100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8 0−1
World of Tanks 60−65
+6200%
1−2
−6200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 12−14 0−1
Metro Exodus 15 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+200%
4−5
−200%
Valorant 21−24
+450%
4−5
−450%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 20
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 20
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%
Metro Exodus 4−5 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+33.3%
14−16
−33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Dota 2 18−20
+26.7%
14−16
−26.7%
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Fortnite 9−10 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−12 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 6−7 0−1
Valorant 8−9 0−1

This is how GTX 960M and 8400M GS compete in popular games:

  • GTX 960M is 4650% faster in 900p
  • GTX 960M is 3400% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 960M is 4100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, GTX 960M surpassed 8400M GS in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.62 0.26
Recency 13 March 2015 9 May 2007
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 11 Watt

GTX 960M has a 3215.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

8400M GS, on the other hand, has 581.8% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 960M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M GS in performance tests.

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 960M
GeForce GTX 960M
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.


3.7 1097 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 960M 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 960M or GeForce 8400M GS, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.