GeForce9400M vs Quadro FX 560

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 GeForce9400M is positioned at rank 630 and the Quadro FX 560 is on rank 390, so the Quadro FX 560 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce9400M

#620

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

5026%

#622

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

4556%

#623

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

4544%

#627

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

4132%

#628

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

4104%

#630

GeForce9400M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#631

Mobility Radeon X1700

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

99%

#632

GeForce 9800 GTX+

MSRP: $229|Avg: $50

99%

#633

Mobility Radeon HD 560v

MSRP: $150|Avg: $30

98%

#634

GeForce 9300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $20

98%

#635

Qualcomm Adreno X1-45 GPU

MSRP: $899|Avg: $400

97%

#636

GeForce 8400M G

MSRP: $50|Avg: $20

97%

#637

Mobility Radeon HD 2400 XT

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

96%

#638

GeForce 8400M GS

MSRP: $50|Avg: $20

96%

#639

GeForce 9100

MSRP: $40|Avg: $5

95%

#640

GeForce 9600M GT

MSRP: $80|Avg: $20

94%

#641

GeForce 8300

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

94%

#642

Mobility Radeon HD 3430

MSRP: $49|Avg: $49

93%

#643

Mobility Radeon HD serie 4200

MSRP: $49|Avg: $10

92%

#644

GeForce 9500 GS

MSRP: $110|Avg: $10

91%

#645

GeForce 9300GE

MSRP: $50|Avg: $15

91%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar Quadro FX 560

#374

Tesla K20m

MSRP: $3199|Avg: $55

38876%

#389

GRID V100-2Q

MSRP: $10000|Avg: $2000

100%

#390

Quadro FX 560

MSRP: $299|Avg: $15

100%

#391

Quadro FX 5800

MSRP: $3499|Avg: $40

92%

#392

FireStream 9170

MSRP: $1999|Avg: $20

84%

#393

RTX Pro 6000 Blackwell DC-12Q

MSRP: $8565|Avg: $8565

84%

#394

Quadro FX 1700

MSRP: $699|Avg: $500

82%

#395

GRID P40-6Q

MSRP: $3000|Avg: $150

79%

#396

Quadro FX 540

MSRP: $299|Avg: $15

71%

#397

Tesla M2070-Q

MSRP: $5489|Avg: $50

63%

#398

Quadro FX 1500

MSRP: $699|Avg: $30

63%

#399

Quadro 7000

MSRP: $14499|Avg: $300

63%

#400

Quadro FX 3700

MSRP: $1599|Avg: $500

61%

#401

Quadro FX 4700 X2

MSRP: $2999|Avg: $15

61%

#402

GRID M10-0B

MSRP: $4000|Avg: $1000

58%

#404

GRID K340

MSRP: $3299|Avg: $57

53%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce9400M is significantly newer (2015 vs 2008). The GeForce9400M likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Quadro FX 560 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The Quadro FX 560 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 7.5% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce9400M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	GeForce9400M	Quadro FX 560
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-7.5%)	✅Leading raw performance (+7.5%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2008 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+300%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the Quadro FX 560 remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.

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.

GeForce9400M Benchmark Check

Quadro FX 560 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce9400M and Quadro FX 560

GeForce9400M

The GeForce9400M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1072 MHz to 1176 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 106 points.

Quadro FX 560

The Quadro FX 560 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: 114 points. Launch price was $3,499.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce9400M scores 106 versus the Quadro FX 560's 114 — the Quadro FX 560 leads by 7.5%. The GeForce9400M is built on Maxwell while the Quadro FX 560 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce9400M) vs 240 (Quadro FX 560). Raw compute: 0.9032 TFLOPS (GeForce9400M) vs 0.6221 TFLOPS (Quadro FX 560).

Feature	GeForce9400M	Quadro FX 560
G3D Mark Score	106	114+8%
Architecture	Maxwell	Tesla 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	55 nm
Shading Units	384+60%	240
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.9032 TFLOPS+45%	0.6221 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	32+300%
TMUs	24	80+233%
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce9400M	Quadro FX 560
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 GeForce9400M comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Quadro FX 560 has 128 MB. The GeForce9400M offers 300% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce9400M) vs 0.25 MB (Quadro FX 560) — the GeForce9400M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce9400M	Quadro FX 560
VRAM Capacity	0.5 GB+300%	0.125 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	64-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB+300%	0.25 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce9400M) vs 9_0c (Quadro FX 560). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce9400M	Quadro FX 560
DirectX	11.1 (10_0)+23%	9_0c
Max Displays	2	2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce9400M draws 33W versus the Quadro FX 560's 189W — a 140.5% difference. The GeForce9400M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce9400M) vs 350W (Quadro FX 560). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs PCIe-powered.