GeForce 8400M G vs Radeon HD 6320

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameLovelandG86
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date15 August 2011 (13 years ago)9 May 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$554.99 no data

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 cores808
Core clock speed508 MHz400 MHz
Boost clock speed600 MHzno data
Number of transistors450 million210 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate4.0643.200
Floating-point processing power0.08128 TFLOPS0.0128 TFLOPS
ROPs44
TMUs88

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 1.0 x16
WidthIGPno data
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 SharedGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared256 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared64 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared400 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data6.4 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.04.0
OpenGL4.43.3
OpenCL1.21.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA-1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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.

HD 6320 147
+153%
8400M G 58

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 August 2011 9 May 2007
Chip lithography 40 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 10 Watt

HD 6320 has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

8400M G, on the other hand, has 80% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 6320 and GeForce 8400M G. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6320 is a desktop card while GeForce 8400M G is a notebook 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 HD 6320
Radeon HD 6320
NVIDIA GeForce 8400M G
GeForce 8400M G

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.


3 190 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 21 vote

Rate GeForce 8400M G 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.