GeForce 8400M GS vs Radeon HD 6250
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6250 with GeForce 8400M GS, including specs and performance data.
8400M GS outperforms HD 6250 by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1417 | 1395 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.88 | 1.80 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | Cedar | G86 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 31 January 2011 (14 years ago) | 9 May 2007 (18 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $14.99 |
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 | 80 | 16 |
| Core clock speed | 650 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 292 million | 210 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 19 Watt | 11 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 5.200 | 3.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.104 TFLOPS | 0.0256 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 4 | 4 |
| TMUs | 8 | 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).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | MXM-I |
| Length | 168 mm | no data |
| Width | 1-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | no 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 type | GDDR3 | DDR2 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 500 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 8 GB/s | 6.4 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 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.
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.
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 | 6
−16.7%
| 7−8
+16.7%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 2.14 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
−8.3%
|
12−14
+8.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| God of War | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 24−27
+0%
|
24−27
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 0−1 | 0−1 |
This is how HD 6250 and 8400M GS compete in popular games:
- 8400M GS is 17% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the 8400M GS is 50% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- 8400M GS is ahead in 2 tests (8%)
- there's a draw in 23 tests (92%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.22 | 0.26 |
| Recency | 31 January 2011 | 9 May 2007 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 256 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 19 Watt | 11 Watt |
HD 6250 has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
8400M GS, on the other hand, has a 18.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 72.7% lower power consumption.
The GeForce 8400M GS is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6250 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6250 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce 8400M GS is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
