GeForce 9400 GT vs Radeon R5 230

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking1167not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTeraScale 2 (2009−2015)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameCaicosG96C
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date3 April 2014 (10 years ago)27 August 2008 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$79.99
Current price$76 $128 (1.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores16016
CUDA coresno data16
Core clock speedno data550 MHz
Number of transistors370 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)19 Watt50 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate5.0004.4 billion/sec
Floating-point performance200.0 gflops29.376 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).

Bus supportPCIe 1.0 x4PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length168 mm6.6" (16.8 cm)
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Width1-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsN/ANone
SLI optionsno 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 typeDDR3DDR2
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data400 MHz
Memory bandwidth10.67 GB/s12.8 GB/s

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGADual Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity1no data
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
DisplayPort support-no data
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

AppAcceleration-no data
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
HD3D-no data
PowerTune-no data
TrueAudio-no data
ZeroCore-no data
​PowerPlay+no data
DDMA audio-no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1111.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.04.0
OpenGL4.42.1
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkanno dataN/A
Mantle-no data
CUDAno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

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


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%

R5 230 221
+53.5%
9400 GT 144

Radeon R5 230 outperforms GeForce 9400 GT by 53% in Passmark.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 April 2014 27 August 2008
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 19 Watt 50 Watt

We couldn't decide between Radeon R5 230 and GeForce 9400 GT. We've got no test results to judge.


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 R5 230
Radeon R5 230
NVIDIA GeForce 9400 GT
GeForce 9400 GT

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.


2.8 212 votes

Rate Radeon R5 230 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 435 votes

Rate GeForce 9400 GT 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.