GeForce GTX 1650 vs GeForce 8400 GS

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.

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

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce 8400 GS

#451

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

1999%

#453

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

1813%

#454

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

1808%

#458

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

1644%

#459

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

1633%

#461

GeForce 8400 GS

MSRP: $30|Avg: $30

100%

#462

Mobility Radeon HD 550v

MSRP: $49|Avg: $15

100%

#463

Radeon HD 8280G

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

99%

#464

Radeon R7 M340

MSRP: $120|Avg: $35

99%

#465

Qualcomm Adreno 690 GPU

MSRP: $200|Avg: $100

99%

#466

Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8790M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $45

98%

#467

Radeon HD 8550G + 8570M Dual

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

98%

#468

Radeon R5 M230

MSRP: $80|Avg: $25

98%

#469

Radeon R9 M275X / M375

MSRP: $300|Avg: $300

97%

#470

Radeon HD 8650G + 8750M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $30

97%

#471

Radeon R9 M370X

MSRP: $300|Avg: $100

96%

#472

Radeon HD 8280

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

96%

#473

GeForce GTX 850A

MSRP: $150|Avg: $50

94%

#474

Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8600/8700M Dual

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

94%

#475

Mobility Radeon HD 5730

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

94%

#476

Radeon R7 A10-7700K

MSRP: $152|Avg: $118

94%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1650 uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1650 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 8400 GS lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1650 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 4727.6% higher G3D Mark score and 700% more VRAM (4 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 8400 GS.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 8400 GS
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+4727.6%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-4727.6%)
Longevity	Turing (2018−2022) (12nm)	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+700%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 1650 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $75 (vs $30), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 1831% better value per dollar than the GeForce 8400 GS.

Insight	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 8400 GS
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+1831%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($75)	✅More affordable ($30)

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.

GeForce GTX 1650 Benchmark Check

GeForce 8400 GS Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 1650 and GeForce 8400 GS

GeForce GTX 1650

The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.

GeForce 8400 GS

The GeForce 8400 GS 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: 163 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the GeForce 8400 GS's 163 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 4727.6%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the GeForce 8400 GS uses Maxwell, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 384 (GeForce 8400 GS). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 0.8632 TFLOPS (GeForce 8400 GS). Boost clocks: 1665 MHz vs 1124 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 8400 GS
G3D Mark Score	7,869+4728%	163
Architecture	Turing	Maxwell
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896+133%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS+246%	0.8632 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1665 MHz+48%	1124 MHz
ROPs	32+300%	8
TMUs	56+250%	16
L1 Cache	896 KB+367%	192 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 8400 GS
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 1.0 (Software)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce 8400 GS has 512 MB. The GeForce GTX 1650 offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 8400 GS
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+700%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 10.0 (GeForce 8400 GS). Vulkan: 1.4 vs None. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 3 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 8400 GS
DirectX	12+20%	10.0
Vulkan	1.4	None
OpenGL	4.6+39%	3.3
Max Displays	3+50%	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th gen (Volta) (GeForce GTX 1650) vs No (GeForce 8400 GS). Decoder: NVDEC 4th gen vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (GeForce 8400 GS).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 8400 GS
Encoder	NVENC 5th gen (Volta)	No
Decoder	NVDEC 4th gen	PureVideo HD VP2
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC,VP8,VP9	MPEG-2,H.264

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the GeForce 8400 GS's 33W — a 77.8% difference. The GeForce 8400 GS is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 350W (GeForce 8400 GS). Power connectors: None vs Legacy. Card length: 229mm vs 170mm, occupying 2 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 70°C vs 65°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	GeForce 8400 GS
TDP	75W	33W-56%
Recommended PSU	300W-14%	350W
Power Connector	None	Legacy
Length	229mm	170mm
Height	111mm	106mm
Slots	2	1-50%
Temp (Load)	70°C	65°C-7%
Perf/Watt	104.9+2041%	4.9

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 1650 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $75, while the GeForce 8400 GS launched at $30 and now averages $30. The GeForce 8400 GS costs 60% less ($45 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 104.9 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 5.4 (GeForce 8400 GS) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 1842.6% better value. The GeForce GTX 1650 is the newer GPU (2019 vs 2014).