
GeForce 8400M GS

Radeon X1600 Pro
GeForce 8400M GS vs Radeon X1600 Pro Performance Spectrum
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.
GeForce 8400M GS vs Radeon X1600 Pro FPS Benchmarks
Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.
Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
GeForce 8400M GS vs Radeon X1600 Pro: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.
GeForce 8400M GS
2014Why buy it
- ✅Costs $99 less on MSRP ($50 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 213.1% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 2.1 vs 0.7 G3D/$ ($50 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 33W instead of 150W, a 117W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than Radeon X1600 Pro across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Less VRAM, with 128 MB vs 512 MB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌2014 hardware with 128 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
Radeon X1600 Pro
2020Why buy it
- ✅2.0% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅300% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (512 MB vs 128 MB).
- ✅GeForce 8400M GS is already obsolete for modern gaming, so Radeon X1600 Pro is the less risky modern option long term.
Trade-offs
- ❌Older hardware, 512 MB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.
- ❌198% HIGHER MSRP$149 MSRPvs$50 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0.7 vs 2.1 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $50 MSRP).
- ❌354.5% higher power demand at 150W vs 33W.
Quick Answers
Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
Which GPU is the better buy today?
GeForce 8400M GS vs Radeon X1600 Pro Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce 8400M GS
The GeForce 8400M GS is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 12 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: 104 points.

Radeon X1600 Pro
The Radeon X1600 Pro is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 21 2020. It features the RDNA 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1130 MHz to 1560 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 150W. Manufactured using 7 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 99 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce 8400M GS scores 104 versus the Radeon X1600 Pro's 99 — the GeForce 8400M GS leads by 5.1%. The GeForce 8400M GS is built on Maxwell while the Radeon X1600 Pro uses RDNA 1.0, both on 28 nm vs 7 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 8400M GS) vs 2,048 (Radeon X1600 Pro). Raw compute: 0.8632 TFLOPS (GeForce 8400M GS) vs 6.39 TFLOPS (Radeon X1600 Pro). Boost clocks: 1124 MHz vs 1560 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 8400M GS | Radeon X1600 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 104+5% | 99 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | RDNA 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 2048+433% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.8632 TFLOPS | 6.39 TFLOPS+640% |
| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz | 1560 MHz+39% |
| ROPs | 8 | 64+700% |
| TMUs | 16 | 128+700% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 3 MB+200% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce 8400M GS gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon X1600 Pro leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.
| Feature | GeForce 8400M GS | Radeon X1600 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | Upscaling support | FSR Upscaling / FSR 4 |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | NVIDIA Reflex | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce 8400M GS has 128 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon X1600 Pro carries 512 MB. Radeon X1600 Pro gives you 300% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce 8400M GS and 64-bit on the Radeon X1600 Pro. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 8400M GS) vs 3 MB (Radeon X1600 Pro) — the Radeon X1600 Pro has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 8400M GS | Radeon X1600 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.125 GB | 0.5 GB+300% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 3 MB+200% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10_0 (GeForce 8400M GS) vs 9.0c (Radeon X1600 Pro). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 2.1. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 8400M GS | Radeon X1600 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10_0+11% | 9.0c |
| OpenGL | 3.3+57% | 2.1 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: PureVideo (GeForce 8400M GS) vs None (Radeon X1600 Pro). Decoder: PureVideo vs Avivo. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,WMV9 (GeForce 8400M GS) vs MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 (Radeon X1600 Pro).
| Feature | GeForce 8400M GS | Radeon X1600 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | PureVideo | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo | Avivo |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1,WMV9 | MPEG-2,H.264,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 8400M GS draws 33W versus the Radeon X1600 Pro's 150W — a 127.9% difference. The GeForce 8400M GS is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 8400M GS) vs 350W (Radeon X1600 Pro). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 75.
| Feature | GeForce 8400M GS | Radeon X1600 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W-78% | 150W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Length | — | 168mm |
| Height | — | 111mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 75-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 3.2+357% | 0.7 |
Value Analysis
At launch, the GeForce 8400M GS came in at $50, while the Radeon X1600 Pro launched at $149. On MSRP, GeForce 8400M GS was 66.4% cheaper ($99 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 2.1 (GeForce 8400M GS) vs 0.7 (Radeon X1600 Pro) — the GeForce 8400M GS offers 200% better value. The newer card here is Radeon X1600 Pro (2020 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce 8400M GS | Radeon X1600 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $50-66% | $149 |
| Performance per Dollar | 2.1+200% | 0.7 |
| Codename | GM108 | Navi 10 |
| Release | March 12 2014 | January 21 2020 |
| Ranking | #854 | #216 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.














