GeForce 8400 vs RTX 3050 4GB Mobile

Place in the ranking	228	1389
Place by popularity	52	not in top-100
Power efficiency	28.16	0.58
Architecture	Ampere (2020−2024)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GN20-P0	G98
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	11 May 2021 (3 years ago)	4 December 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$69.78

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	1238 MHz	540 MHz
Boost clock speed	1500 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	no data	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	8 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt (35 - 80 Watt TGP)	25 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	4.320
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.0208 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	4
TMUs	no data	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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	no data	PCIe 2.0 x16
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR6	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	256 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	12000 MHz	500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	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 Connectors

no data

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12_2	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	no data	4.0
OpenGL	no data	3.3
OpenCL	no data	1.1
Vulkan	-	N/A
CUDA	-	1.1

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	64	0−1
1440p	45	-0−1
4K	29	-0−1

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	42	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	66	0−1
Elden Ring	51	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	38	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	46	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	115	0−1
Metro Exodus	83	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	87	0−1
Valorant	133 +13200%	1−2 −13200%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	30	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	37	0−1
Dota 2	96	0−1
Elden Ring	86	0−1
Far Cry 5	73	0−1
Fortnite	120−130 +12300%	1−2 −12300%
Forza Horizon 4	94	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	86	0−1
Metro Exodus	57	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +15400%	1−2 −15400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	50−55	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	75−80	0−1
Valorant	68	0−1
World of Tanks	250−260 +12700%	2−3 −12700%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	75−80	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	45−50	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	31	0−1
Dota 2	112	0−1
Far Cry 5	75−80	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	81	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	150−160 +15400%	1−2 −15400%
Valorant	95−100	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	48	0−1
Elden Ring	40−45	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	48	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +17400%	1−2 −17400%
Red Dead Redemption 2	21−24	0−1
World of Tanks	160−170 +16200%	1−2 −16200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	21−24	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	17	0−1
Far Cry 5	70−75	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	56	0−1
Metro Exodus	52	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	35−40	0−1
Valorant	65−70	0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	21−24	0−1
Dota 2	44	0−1
Elden Ring	18−20	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	44	0−1
Metro Exodus	17	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	75−80	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	44	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	21−24	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	5	0−1
Dota 2	62	0−1
Far Cry 5	30−35	0−1
Fortnite	30−33	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	34	0−1
Valorant	30−35	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.55	0.21
Recency	11 May 2021	4 December 2007
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	8 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	60 Watt	25 Watt

RTX 3050 4GB Mobile has a 11590.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 8400, on the other hand, has 140% lower power consumption.

The GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce RTX 3050 4GB Mobile is a notebook card while GeForce 8400 is a desktop one.

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