GeForce 9400 GT vs GTX 980 SLI Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile with GeForce 9400 GT, including specs and performance data.

GTX 980 SLI Mobile
2015
2x 8 GB GDDR5, 330 Watt
39.29
+9255%

GTX 980 SLI Mobile outperforms 9400 GT by a whopping 9255% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1141250
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency8.160.58
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameN16E-GXX SLIG96C
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date22 September 2015 (9 years ago)27 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$79.99

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 cores409616
Core clock speed1126 MHz550 MHz
Boost clock speed1228 MHzno data
Number of transistors10400 Million314 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)330 Watt50 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rateno data4.400
Floating-point processing powerno data0.0448 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
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 amount2x 8 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed3500 MHz400 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data12.8 GB/s
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 Connectorsno dataDual Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
G-SYNC support+-
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_111.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data2.1
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA++

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 HD133
+13200%
1−2
−13200%
4K630−1

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data79.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 65−70 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70 0−1
Battlefield 5 120−130
+12300%
1−2
−12300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70 0−1
Far Cry 5 80−85 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+9500%
1−2
−9500%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+9400%
2−3
−9400%
Hitman 3 80−85 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+16100%
1−2
−16100%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+12300%
1−2
−12300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150
+14000%
1−2
−14000%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+12700%
1−2
−12700%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70 0−1
Battlefield 5 120−130
+12300%
1−2
−12300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70 0−1
Far Cry 5 80−85 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 95−100
+9500%
1−2
−9500%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+9400%
2−3
−9400%
Hitman 3 80−85 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+16100%
1−2
−16100%
Metro Exodus 120−130
+12300%
1−2
−12300%
Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150
+14000%
1−2
−14000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 137
+13600%
1−2
−13600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+12700%
1−2
−12700%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 80−85 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 65−70 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 65−70 0−1
Far Cry 5 80−85 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+9400%
2−3
−9400%
Hitman 3 80−85 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+16100%
1−2
−16100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 140−150
+14000%
1−2
−14000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 74 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 120−130
+12700%
1−2
−12700%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 90−95 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 70−75 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 55−60 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 40−45 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 30−33 0−1
Far Cry 5 45−50 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 210−220
+10750%
2−3
−10750%
Hitman 3 50−55 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 80−85 0−1
Metro Exodus 70−75 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 90−95 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 190−200
+9400%
2−3
−9400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35 0−1
Hitman 3 30−35 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 180−190
+17900%
1−2
−17900%
Metro Exodus 45−50 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 51 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14 0−1
Far Cry 5 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 50−55 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35 0−1

This is how GTX 980 SLI Mobile and 9400 GT compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980 SLI Mobile is 13200% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 39.29 0.42
Recency 22 September 2015 27 August 2008
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 330 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 980 SLI Mobile has a 9254.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

9400 GT, on the other hand, has 560% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9400 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile is a notebook card while GeForce 9400 GT is a desktop one.


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 980 SLI Mobile
GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile
NVIDIA GeForce 9400 GT
GeForce 9400 GT

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.


3.3 66 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980 SLI Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 496 votes

Rate GeForce 9400 GT 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.