Radeon RX 6750 XT vs HD 8400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8400 with Radeon RX 6750 XT, including specs and performance data.

HD 8400
2013
25 Watt
0.69

RX 6750 XT outperforms HD 8400 by a whopping 7696% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking113640
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.0830.07
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)Navi / RDNA2 (2020−2022)
GPU code nameKabiniNavi 22
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date23 May 2013 (11 years ago)3 March 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$549
Current price$78 $559 (1x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 6750 XT has 37488% better value for money than HD 8400.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1282560
Core clock speed600 MHz2150 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2600 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million17,200 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt250 Watt
Texture fill rate3.200416.0

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon HD 8400 and Radeon RX 6750 XT compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

InterfaceIGPPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin

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 Shared12 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared192 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared18000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data432.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMIno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

HD 8400 0.69
RX 6750 XT 53.79
+7696%

RX 6750 XT outperforms HD 8400 by 7696% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

HD 8400 265
RX 6750 XT 20772
+7738%

RX 6750 XT outperforms HD 8400 by 7738% in Passmark.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

HD 8400 614
RX 6750 XT 48327
+7771%

RX 6750 XT outperforms HD 8400 by 7771% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

HD 8400 2013
RX 6750 XT 104004
+5067%

RX 6750 XT outperforms HD 8400 by 5067% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

HD 8400 401
RX 6750 XT 37609
+9279%

RX 6750 XT outperforms HD 8400 by 9279% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

HD 8400 2883
RX 6750 XT 170993
+5831%

RX 6750 XT outperforms HD 8400 by 5831% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

HD 8400 36156
RX 6750 XT 529598
+1365%

RX 6750 XT outperforms HD 8400 by 1365% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

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 HD11
−1336%
158
+1336%
1440p1−2
−8700%
88
+8700%
4K0−152

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 no data
Hitman 3 2−3 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 no data
Hitman 3 2−3 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 no data
Far Cry 5 1−2 no data
Hitman 3 7−8 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 no data

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2 no data
Metro Exodus 4−5 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
−7642%
7200−7250
+7642%
Battlefield 5 170−180
−7678%
13300−13350
+7678%
Far Cry 5 100−110
−7662%
8150−8200
+7662%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
−7675%
14150−14200
+7675%
Metro Exodus 130−140
−7665%
10250−10300
+7665%
Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120
−7663%
8850−8900
+7663%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
−7642%
7200−7250
+7642%
Battlefield 5 170−180
−7678%
13300−13350
+7678%
Far Cry 5 100−110
−7662%
8150−8200
+7662%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
−7675%
14150−14200
+7675%
Metro Exodus 72
−7678%
5600−5650
+7678%
Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120
−7663%
8850−8900
+7663%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 90−95
−7642%
7200−7250
+7642%
Far Cry 5 100−110
−7662%
8150−8200
+7662%
Forza Horizon 4 180−190
−7675%
14150−14200
+7675%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 110−120
−7663%
8850−8900
+7663%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 110−120
−7668%
8700−8750
+7668%
Far Cry New Dawn 120−130
−7660%
9700−9750
+7660%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 60−65
−7678%
4900−4950
+7678%
Forza Horizon 4 120−130
−7692%
9350−9400
+7692%
Metro Exodus 126
−7678%
9800−9850
+7678%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 186
−7669%
14450−14500
+7669%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 85−90
−7684%
6850−6900
+7684%
Watch Dogs: Legion 73
−7640%
5650−5700
+7640%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
−7612%
4550−4600
+7612%
Hitman 3 45−50
−7678%
3500−3550
+7678%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 60
−7650%
4650−4700
+7650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 79
−7685%
6150−6200
+7685%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35−40
−7663%
2950−3000
+7663%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 35−40
−7603%
2850−2900
+7603%
Cyberpunk 2077 26
−7592%
2000−2050
+7592%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−7614%
2700−2750
+7614%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
−7650%
6200−6250
+7650%
Watch Dogs: Legion 41
−7583%
3150−3200
+7583%

This is how HD 8400 and RX 6750 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 6750 XT is 1336% faster in 1080p
  • RX 6750 XT is 8700% faster in 1440p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.69 53.79
Recency 23 May 2013 3 March 2022
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 250 Watt

The Radeon RX 6750 XT 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 Radeon RX 6750 XT 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
AMD Radeon RX 6750 XT
Radeon RX 6750 XT

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.


2.8 123 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 2206 votes

Rate Radeon RX 6750 XT 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.