GeForce GT 230 OEM vs Radeon HD 8400E

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1169not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.95no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameKalindiG92B
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date23 April 2013 (11 years ago)27 April 2009 (15 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 cores12896
Core clock speed600 MHz500 MHz
Number of transistors1,178 million754 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate4.80024.00
Floating-point processing power0.1536 TFLOPS0.24 TFLOPS
ROPs412
TMUs848

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 2.0 x16
Widthno data1-slot
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 SharedDDR2
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1536 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared192 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared500 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data24 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 outputsNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.34.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan1.2.131N/A
CUDA-1.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 April 2013 27 April 2009
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 75 Watt

HD 8400E has an age advantage of 3 years, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon HD 8400E and GeForce GT 230 OEM. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8400E is a notebook card while GeForce GT 230 OEM 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 8400E
Radeon HD 8400E
NVIDIA GeForce GT 230 OEM
GeForce GT 230 OEM

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.


1.4 7 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 6 votes

Rate GeForce GT 230 OEM 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.