GeForce 9400 GT vs Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) with GeForce 9400 GT, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
5.22
+1274%

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) outperforms 9400 GT by a whopping 1274% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking5981259
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency27.690.60
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameVega RenoirG96C
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2020 (5 years ago)27 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$79.99

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 cores38416
Core clock speed400 MHz550 MHz
Boost clock speed1500 MHzno data
Number of transistorsno data314 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt50 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rateno data4.400
Floating-point processing powerno data0.0448 TFLOPS
ROPsno data4
TMUsno data8

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 supportno dataPCI-E 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data168 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options-+

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 data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data400 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data12.8 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 dataDual Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12_111.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data2.1
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-+

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 HD20
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
1440p23
+2200%
1−2
−2200%
4K18
+1700%
1−2
−1700%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data79.99
1440pno data79.99
4Kno data79.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 19
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Counter-Strike 2 52
+1633%
3−4
−1633%
Cyberpunk 2077 13 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Battlefield 5 22
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Counter-Strike 2 34
+1600%
2−3
−1600%
Cyberpunk 2077 10 0−1
Far Cry 5 15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Fortnite 33
+1550%
2−3
−1550%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Forza Horizon 5 12 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Valorant 97
+1286%
7−8
−1286%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 9 0−1
Battlefield 5 21
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
Counter-Strike 2 14
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 56
+1300%
4−5
−1300%
Cyberpunk 2077 7 0−1
Dota 2 42
+1300%
3−4
−1300%
Far Cry 5 16
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Fortnite 22
+2100%
1−2
−2100%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
Forza Horizon 5 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Metro Exodus 8 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Valorant 73
+1360%
5−6
−1360%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 19
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Cyberpunk 2077 8 0−1
Dota 2 40
+1900%
2−3
−1900%
Far Cry 5 16
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+2500%
1−2
−2500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+2000%
1−2
−2000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11 0−1
Valorant 19
+1800%
1−2
−1800%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 30−35
+1600%
2−3
−1600%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 40−45
+1333%
3−4
−1333%
Grand Theft Auto V 7−8 0−1
Metro Exodus 5−6 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+1750%
2−3
−1750%
Valorant 49
+1533%
3−4
−1533%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−12 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 12−14 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12 0−1

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 4−5 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3 0−1
Valorant 22
+2100%
1−2
−2100%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Dota 2 19
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Far Cry 5 6−7 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7 0−1

This is how RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and 9400 GT compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 1900% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 2200% faster in 1440p
  • RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is 1700% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.22 0.38
Recency 7 January 2020 27 August 2008
Chip lithography 7 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 50 Watt

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has a 1273.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 685.7% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9400 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook card while GeForce 9400 GT 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 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
NVIDIA GeForce 9400 GT
GeForce 9400 GT

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.


4 716 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 507 votes

Rate GeForce 9400 GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) or GeForce 9400 GT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.