GeForce 8400M G vs GTX 980

Place in the ranking	200	1352
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	10.91	no data
Power efficiency	12.06	1.88
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GM204	G86
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	19 September 2014 (10 years ago)	9 May 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$549	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores	2048	8
Core clock speed	1064 MHz	400 MHz
Boost clock speed	1216 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	5,200 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	165 Watt	10 Watt
Texture fill rate	155.6	3.200
Floating-point processing power	4.981 TFLOPS	0.0128 TFLOPS
ROPs	64	4
TMUs	128	8

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).

Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 1.0 x16
Length	267 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Recommended system power (PSU)	500 Watt	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	None
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 type	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	256 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	7.0 GB/s	400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	224 GB/s	6.4 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 Connectors	Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2	No outputs
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
VGA аnalog display support	+	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
G-SYNC support	+	-
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream	+	-
GeForce ShadowPlay	+	-
GPU Boost	2.0	no data
GameWorks	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
BatteryBoost	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.4	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/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. 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 980 28.54
+10470%

8400M G 0.27

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 980 11109
+10480%

8400M G 105

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	92	0−1
1440p	50	-0−1
4K	40	-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p	5.97	no data
1440p	10.98	no data
4K	13.73	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	55−60 +817%	6−7 −817%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 +2900%	2−3 −2900%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	75	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 +817%	6−7 −817%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 +2900%	2−3 −2900%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +2520%	5−6 −2520%
Forza Horizon 5	75−80	0−1
Metro Exodus	70−75	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 +1425%	4−5 −1425%
Valorant	110−120 +11400%	1−2 −11400%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	77	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 +817%	6−7 −817%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 +2900%	2−3 −2900%
Dota 2	48	0−1
Far Cry 5	80−85 +1086%	7−8 −1086%
Fortnite	105	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +2520%	5−6 −2520%
Forza Horizon 5	75−80	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	72	0−1
Metro Exodus	70−75	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	194 +3133%	6−7 −3133%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 +1425%	4−5 −1425%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	67 +1575%	4−5 −1575%
Valorant	110−120 +11400%	1−2 −11400%
World of Tanks	270−280 +2158%	12−14 −2158%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	67	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	55−60 +817%	6−7 −817%
Cyberpunk 2077	60−65 +2900%	2−3 −2900%
Dota 2	95−100	0−1
Far Cry 5	80−85 +1086%	7−8 −1086%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +2520%	5−6 −2520%
Forza Horizon 5	75−80	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	69 +1050%	6−7 −1050%
Valorant	110−120 +11400%	1−2 −11400%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	50−55	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	50−55	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +17400%	1−2 −17400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30	0−1
World of Tanks	180−190 +18700%	1−2 −18700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	47	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	24−27 +767%	3−4 −767%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +2100%	4−5 −2100%
Forza Horizon 4	75−80	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	45−50	0−1
Metro Exodus	65−70	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +1025%	4−5 −1025%
Valorant	80−85 +1925%	4−5 −1925%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Dota 2	59 +293%	14−16 −293%
Grand Theft Auto V	59 +293%	14−16 −293%
Metro Exodus	21−24	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	18−20	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	59 +293%	14−16 −293%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	22	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	12−14 +100%	6−7 −100%
Cyberpunk 2077	10−12 +450%	2−3 −450%
Dota 2	50−55 +247%	14−16 −247%
Far Cry 5	35−40	0−1
Fortnite	30	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	45−50	0−1
Forza Horizon 5	24−27	0−1
Valorant	40−45	0−1

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

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 980 is 17400% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GTX 980 surpassed 8400M G in all 31 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	28.54	0.27
Recency	19 September 2014	9 May 2007
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	165 Watt	10 Watt

GTX 980 has a 10470.4% 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 G, on the other hand, has 1550% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 980 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400M G in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 980 is a desktop card while GeForce 8400M G is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.