GeForce 8400 SE vs HD Graphics 405

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared HD Graphics 405 with GeForce 8400 SE, including specs and performance data.

HD Graphics 405
2015
6 Watt
0.74
+311%

HD Graphics 405 outperforms 8400 SE by a whopping 311% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11651409
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency8.490.25
ArchitectureGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameBraswell GT1G86S
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date1 April 2015 (9 years ago)1 August 2008 (16 years ago)

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 cores12816
Core clock speed200 MHz459 MHz
Boost clock speed600 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate9.6003.672
Floating-point processing power0.1536 TFLOPS0.02938 TFLOPS
ROPs24
TMUs168

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).

InterfaceRing BusPCIe 1.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeSystem SharedDDR2
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared128 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared400 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data6.4 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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependent1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.33.3
OpenCL3.01.1
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 HD15
+400%
3−4
−400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Fortnite 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
World of Tanks 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5 0−1
World of Tanks 3−4 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 4−5 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Valorant 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Valorant 1−2 0−1

This is how HD Graphics 405 and 8400 SE compete in popular games:

  • HD Graphics 405 is 400% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.74 0.18
Recency 1 April 2015 1 August 2008
Chip lithography 14 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 50 Watt

HD Graphics 405 has a 311.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 733.3% lower power consumption.

The HD Graphics 405 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8400 SE in performance tests.

Be aware that HD Graphics 405 is a notebook card while GeForce 8400 SE 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.


Intel HD Graphics 405
HD Graphics 405
NVIDIA GeForce 8400 SE
GeForce 8400 SE

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.


2.7 206 votes

Rate HD Graphics 405 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 8 votes

Rate GeForce 8400 SE 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.