GeForce 9400M vs RTX 2070

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce RTX 2070 with GeForce 9400M, including specs and performance data.

RTX 2070
2018, $499
8 GB GDDR6, 175 Watt
37.92
+15700%

RTX 2070 outperforms 9400M by a whopping 15700% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1311424
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation25.85no data
Power efficiency16.861.56
ArchitectureTuring (2018−2022)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameTU106C79
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date17 October 2018 (7 years ago)15 October 2008 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores230416
Core clock speed1410 MHz580 MHz
Boost clock speed1620 MHzno data
Number of transistors10,800 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology12 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)175 Watt12 Watt
Texture fill rate233.34.640
Floating-point processing power7.465 TFLOPS0.0448 TFLOPS
ROPs644
TMUs1448
Tensor Cores288no data
Ray Tracing Cores36no data
L1 Cache2.3 MBno data
L2 Cache4 MBno data

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 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pinno data

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 typeGDDR6System Shared
Maximum RAM amount8 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1750 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth448.0 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a, 1x USB Type-CNo outputs
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

VR Ready+no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12 Ultimate (12_2)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.84.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL3.0N/A
Vulkan1.3N/A
CUDA7.5-
DLSS+-

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

RTX 2070 37.92
+15700%
GeForce 9400M 0.24

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.

RTX 2070 16066
+15807%
Samples: 15341
GeForce 9400M 101
Samples: 116

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 HD1220−1
1440p850−1
4K62-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.09no data
1440p5.87no data
4K8.05no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+21300%
1−2
−21300%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95 0−1

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 126 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+21300%
1−2
−21300%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 121 0−1
Far Cry 5 114 0−1
Fortnite 174
+17300%
1−2
−17300%
Forza Horizon 4 142 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 120−130 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 211
+21000%
1−2
−21000%
Valorant 258
+25700%
1−2
−25700%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 117 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+21300%
1−2
−21300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+27700%
1−2
−27700%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95 0−1
Dota 2 138 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 121 0−1
Far Cry 5 110 0−1
Fortnite 162
+16100%
1−2
−16100%
Forza Horizon 4 135 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 120−130 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 127 0−1
Metro Exodus 78 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 202
+20100%
1−2
−20100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 158
+15700%
1−2
−15700%
Valorant 248
+24700%
1−2
−24700%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 108 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95 0−1
Dota 2 130 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 119 0−1
Far Cry 5 104 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 110 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 147 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 87 0−1
Valorant 184
+18300%
1−2
−18300%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 156 0−1

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 95−100 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+27100%
1−2
−27100%
Grand Theft Auto V 80−85 0−1
Metro Exodus 50 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+17400%
1−2
−17400%
Valorant 243
+24200%
1−2
−24200%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 88 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 91 0−1
Far Cry 5 88 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 93 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 70−75 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 109 0−1

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 86 0−1
Metro Exodus 32 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 63 0−1
Valorant 231
+23000%
1−2
−23000%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 55 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Dota 2 116 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 46 0−1
Far Cry 5 49 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 63 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 61 0−1

4K
Epic

Fortnite 53 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 37.92 0.24
Recency 17 October 2018 15 October 2008
Chip lithography 12 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 175 Watt 12 Watt

RTX 2070 has a 15700% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, and a 441.7% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 9400M, on the other hand, has 1358.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 2070 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9400M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 2070 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce 9400M 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 RTX 2070
GeForce RTX 2070
NVIDIA GeForce 9400M
GeForce 9400M

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.


4.1 4202 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2070 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 52 votes

Rate GeForce 9400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce RTX 2070 or GeForce 9400M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.