GeForce 8400 vs Quadro FX 370
GeForce 8400
Popular choices:
Quadro FX 370
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 8400 is positioned at rank 657 and the Quadro FX 370 is on rank 373, so the Quadro FX 370 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 8400
Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 370
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce 8400 is significantly newer (2014 vs 2008). The GeForce 8400 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 370 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Quadro FX 370 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3.7% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce 8400 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce 8400 | Quadro FX 370 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3.7%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 8400 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 8400 holds the technical lead. Priced at $5 (vs $500), it costs 99% less, resulting in a 9542.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce 8400 | Quadro FX 370 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+9542.9%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($5) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($500) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 8400 and Quadro FX 370
GeForce 8400
The GeForce 8400 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 17 2014. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1029 MHz to 1124 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 81 points.
Quadro FX 370
The Quadro FX 370 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 11 2008. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 610 MHz. It has 240 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 189W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 84 points. Launch price was $3,499.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 8400 scores 81 and the Quadro FX 370 reaches 84 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 8400 is built on Maxwell while the Quadro FX 370 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 8400) vs 240 (Quadro FX 370). Raw compute: 0.8632 TFLOPS (GeForce 8400) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 370).
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | Quadro FX 370 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 81 | 84+4% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+60% | 240 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.8632 TFLOPS+39% | 0.6221 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 32+300% |
| TMUs | 16 | 80+400% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | Quadro FX 370 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce 8400 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 370 has 256 MB. The GeForce 8400 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 8400) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 370) — the GeForce 8400 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | Quadro FX 370 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB+100% | 0.25 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+300% | 0.25 MB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (GeForce 8400) vs 10.0 (Quadro FX 370). Vulkan: None vs N/A. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 2.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | Quadro FX 370 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.0 | 10.0 |
| Vulkan | None | N/A |
| OpenGL | 3.3+57% | 2.1 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (GeForce 8400) vs None (Quadro FX 370). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP2 vs PureVideo 2. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (GeForce 8400) vs MPEG-2 (Quadro FX 370).
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | Quadro FX 370 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP2 | PureVideo 2 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264 | MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 8400 draws 33W versus the Quadro FX 370's 189W — a 140.5% difference. The GeForce 8400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 8400) vs 350W (Quadro FX 370). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 170mm vs 168mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots.
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | Quadro FX 370 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W-83% | 189W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 170mm | 168mm |
| Height | 106mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 2.5+525% | 0.4 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 8400 launched at $45 MSRP and currently averages $5, while the Quadro FX 370 launched at $129 and now averages $500. The GeForce 8400 costs 99% less ($495 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 16.2 (GeForce 8400) vs 0.2 (Quadro FX 370) — the GeForce 8400 offers 8000% better value. The GeForce 8400 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2008).
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | Quadro FX 370 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $45-65% | $129 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-99% | $500 |
| Performance per Dollar | 16.2+8000% | 0.2 |
| Codename | GM108 | GT200B |
| Release | March 17 2014 | November 11 2008 |
| Ranking | #850 | #815 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 8400 and Quadro FX 370
