GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition vs Radeon HD 8400

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8400 with GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition, including specs and performance data.

HD 8400
2013
25 Watt
0.69

GT 640M Mac Edition outperforms HD 8400 by an impressive 57% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11791089
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameKabiniGK107
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date23 May 2013 (11 years ago)3 February 2013 (11 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 cores128384
Core clock speed600 MHz745 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million1,270 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt32 Watt
Texture fill rate3.20023.84
Floating-point processing power0.1024 gflops0.5722 gflops

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

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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared512 MB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data5000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data40 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 graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (12_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA-3.0

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 HD10
−40%
14−16
+40%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−50%
45−50
+50%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−50%
45−50
+50%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−45.5%
16−18
+45.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−33
−50%
45−50
+50%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
−50%
9−10
+50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

This is how HD 8400 and GT 640M Mac Edition compete in popular games:

  • GT 640M Mac Edition is 40% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.69 1.08
Recency 23 May 2013 3 February 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 32 Watt

HD 8400 has an age advantage of 3 months, and 28% lower power consumption.

GT 640M Mac Edition, on the other hand, has a 56.5% higher aggregate performance score.

The GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8400 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8400 is a notebook card while GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition 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.


AMD Radeon HD 8400
Radeon HD 8400
NVIDIA GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition
GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition

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.


2.8 126 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 9 votes

Rate GeForce GT 640M Mac Edition 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.