GeForce 8400 GS Rev. 3 vs Radeon RX Vega 5

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking711not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency21.73no data
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameVegaGT218
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2020 (5 years ago)12 July 2010 (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 cores32016
Core clock speedno data520 MHz
Boost clock speed1400 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data260 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rateno data4.160
Floating-point processing powerno data0.03936 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8
L2 Cacheno data32 KB

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data170 mm
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 typeno dataDDR2
Maximum RAM amountno data512 MB
Memory bus widthno data64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data400 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data6.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectorsno data1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API and SDK support

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

DirectX12_111.1 (10_1)
Shader Modelno data4.1
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-1.2

Pros & cons summary


Recency 7 January 2020 12 July 2010
Chip lithography 7 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 25 Watt

RX Vega 5 has an age advantage of 9 years, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon RX Vega 5 and GeForce 8400 GS Rev. 3. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 5 is a notebook graphics card while GeForce 8400 GS Rev. 3 is a desktop one.

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 RX Vega 5
Radeon RX Vega 5
NVIDIA GeForce 8400 GS Rev. 3
GeForce 8400 GS Rev. 3

Other comparisons

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.


3.9 231 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 5 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 133 votes

Rate GeForce 8400 GS Rev. 3 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 5 or GeForce 8400 GS Rev. 3, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.