T400 vs Radeon Graphics 384SP

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated470
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data21.81
ArchitectureGCN 5.1 (2018−2022)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameCezanneTU117
Market segmentDesktopWorkstation
Release date13 April 2021 (3 years ago)6 May 2021 (3 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 cores384384
Core clock speed300 MHz420 MHz
Boost clock speed1700 MHz1425 MHz
Number of transistors9,800 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate40.8034.20
Floating-point processing power1.306 TFLOPS1.094 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs2424

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 3.0 x16
WidthIGP1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone

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 SharedGDDR6
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared2 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared1250 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data80 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 ConnectorsNo outputs3x mini-DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (12_1)
Shader Model6.7 (6.4)6.6
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.13.0
Vulkan1.31.2
CUDA-7.5

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 7 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 30 Watt

Graphics 384SP has a 71.4% more advanced lithography process.

T400, on the other hand, has 50% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon Graphics 384SP and T400. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon Graphics 384SP is a desktop card while T400 is a workstation 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.


AMD Radeon Graphics 384SP
Radeon Graphics 384SP
NVIDIA T400
T400

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.


4.4 20 votes

Rate Radeon Graphics 384SP on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 375 votes

Rate T400 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.