Mobility Radeon X2500 vs GeForce 8400
Mobility Radeon X2500
Popular choices:
GeForce 8400
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 Mobility Radeon X2500 is positioned at rank 668 and the GeForce 8400 is on rank 657, so the GeForce 8400 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Mobility Radeon X2500
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 8400
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Mobility Radeon X2500 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce 8400 offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | Mobility Radeon X2500 | GeForce 8400 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2010 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 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 $15), it costs 67% less, resulting in a 196.3% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Mobility Radeon X2500 | GeForce 8400 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+196.3%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($15) | ✅More affordable ($5) |
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 Mobility Radeon X2500 and GeForce 8400
Mobility Radeon X2500
The Mobility Radeon X2500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 7 2010. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 700 MHz. It has 800 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 82 points.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Mobility Radeon X2500 scores 82 and the GeForce 8400 reaches 81 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Mobility Radeon X2500 is built on TeraScale 2 while the GeForce 8400 uses Maxwell, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 800 (Mobility Radeon X2500) vs 384 (GeForce 8400). Raw compute: 1.12 TFLOPS (Mobility Radeon X2500) vs 0.8632 TFLOPS (GeForce 8400).
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X2500 | GeForce 8400 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 82+1% | 81 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 800+108% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.12 TFLOPS+30% | 0.8632 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 40+150% | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 80 KB | 192 KB+140% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X2500 | GeForce 8400 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Mobility Radeon X2500 comes with 256 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce 8400 has 512 MB. The GeForce 8400 offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (Mobility Radeon X2500) vs 1 MB (GeForce 8400) — the GeForce 8400 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X2500 | GeForce 8400 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.25 GB | 0.5 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 9.0c (Mobility Radeon X2500) vs 10.0 (GeForce 8400). OpenGL: 2.0 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X2500 | GeForce 8400 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 9.0c | 10.0+11% |
| OpenGL | 2.0 | 3.3+65% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Supported codecs: MPEG-2,VC-1 (Mobility Radeon X2500) vs MPEG-2,H.264 (GeForce 8400).
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X2500 | GeForce 8400 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | — | No |
| Decoder | — | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,VC-1 | MPEG-2,H.264 |
Power & Dimensions
The Mobility Radeon X2500 draws 50W versus the GeForce 8400's 33W — a 41% difference. The GeForce 8400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Mobility Radeon X2500) vs 350W (GeForce 8400). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 75°C vs 65°C.
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X2500 | GeForce 8400 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 33W-34% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | — | 170mm |
| Height | — | 106mm |
| Slots | — | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 75°C | 65°C-13% |
| Perf/Watt | 1.6 | 2.5+56% |
Value Analysis
The Mobility Radeon X2500 launched at $50 MSRP and currently averages $15, while the GeForce 8400 launched at $45 and now averages $5. The GeForce 8400 costs 66.7% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 5.5 (Mobility Radeon X2500) vs 16.2 (GeForce 8400) — the GeForce 8400 offers 194.5% better value. The GeForce 8400 is the newer GPU (2014 vs 2010).
| Feature | Mobility Radeon X2500 | GeForce 8400 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $50 | $45-10% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | $5-67% |
| Performance per Dollar | 5.5 | 16.2+195% |
| Codename | Broadway | GM108 |
| Release | January 7 2010 | March 17 2014 |
| Ranking | #846 | #850 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Mobility Radeon X2500 and GeForce 8400
