CPU
GPU
GeForce 8400
Popular choices:
RTX A4000
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. The GeForce 8400 is positioned at rank #657 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 8400
Performance Per Dollar RTX A4000
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The RTX A4000 is significantly newer (2021 vs 2014). The RTX A4000 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce 8400 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The RTX A4000 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 23928.4% higher G3D Mark score and 3100% more VRAM (16 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 8400.
| Insight | GeForce 8400 | RTX A4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-23928.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+23928.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🏆Elite Architecture (Ampere (2020−2025) / 8nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | ✨ DLSS 3/4 + Frame Gen Support |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | 🎮 High Capacity (16 GB) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The RTX A4000 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $1,111 (vs $5), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 8.1% better value per dollar than the GeForce 8400.
| Insight | GeForce 8400 | RTX A4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+8.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($5) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($1,111) |
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 RTX A4000
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.
RTX A4000
The RTX A4000 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 12 2021. It features the Ampere architecture. The core clock ranges from 735 MHz to 1560 MHz. It has 6144 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 140W. Manufactured using 8 nm process technology. It features 48 dedicated ray tracing cores for enhanced lighting effects. G3D Mark benchmark score: 19,463 points.
Graphics Performance
In G3D Mark, the GeForce 8400 scores 81 versus the RTX A4000's 19,463 — the RTX A4000 leads by 23928.4%. The GeForce 8400 is built on Maxwell while the RTX A4000 uses Ampere, both on 28 nm vs 8 nm. Shader units: 384 (GeForce 8400) vs 6,144 (RTX A4000). Raw compute: 0.8632 TFLOPS (GeForce 8400) vs 19.17 TFLOPS (RTX A4000). Boost clocks: 1124 MHz vs 1560 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | RTX A4000 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 81 | 19,463+23928% |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Ampere |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 8 nm |
| Shading Units | 384 | 6144+1500% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.8632 TFLOPS | 19.17 TFLOPS+2121% |
| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz | 1560 MHz+39% |
| ROPs | 8 | 96+1100% |
| TMUs | 16 | 192+1100% |
| L1 Cache | 0.19 MB | 6 MB+3058% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | RTX A4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | NVIDIA Reflex |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce 8400 comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the RTX A4000 has 16 GB. The RTX A4000 offers 3100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 192-bit. L2 Cache: 1 MB (GeForce 8400) vs 4 MB (RTX A4000) — the RTX A4000 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | RTX A4000 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 16 GB+3100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | 448 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 192-bit+50% |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (GeForce 8400) vs 12.2 (RTX A4000). Vulkan: None vs 1.2. OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | RTX A4000 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.0 | 12.2+22% |
| Vulkan | None | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 4+100% |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No (GeForce 8400) vs 7th Gen NVENC (RTX A4000). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP2 vs 5th Gen NVDEC. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (GeForce 8400) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) (RTX A4000).
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | RTX A4000 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No | 7th Gen NVENC |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP2 | 5th Gen NVDEC |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC,VP9,AV1 (Decode) |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 8400 draws 33W versus the RTX A4000's 140W — a 123.7% difference. The GeForce 8400 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 8400) vs 650W (RTX A4000). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 170mm vs 241mm, occupying 1 vs 1 slots. Typical load temperature: 65°C vs 75°C.
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | RTX A4000 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 33W-76% | 140W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-46% | 650W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 170mm | 241mm |
| Height | 106mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1 | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 65°C-13% | 75°C |
| Perf/Watt | 2.5 | 139.0+5460% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 8400 launched at $45 MSRP and currently averages $5, while the RTX A4000 launched at $1111 and now averages $1111. The GeForce 8400 costs 99.5% less ($1106 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 16.2 (GeForce 8400) vs 17.5 (RTX A4000) — the RTX A4000 offers 8% better value. The RTX A4000 is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce 8400 | RTX A4000 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $45-96% | $1111 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-100% | $1111 |
| Performance per Dollar | 16.2 | 17.5+8% |
| Codename | GM108 | GA104 |
| Release | March 17 2014 | April 12 2021 |
| Ranking | #850 | #85 |
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 RTX A4000
