Radeon HD 8400E vs GeForce 9650M GS
Radeon HD 8400E
Popular choices:
GeForce 9650M GS
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 Radeon HD 8400E is positioned at rank 140 and the GeForce 9650M GS is on rank 680, so the Radeon HD 8400E offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 8400E
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9650M GS
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon HD 8400E is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 9650M GS.
| Insight | Radeon HD 8400E | GeForce 9650M GS |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon HD 8400E offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon HD 8400E holds the technical lead. Priced at $5 (vs $20), it costs 75% less, resulting in a 308.9% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon HD 8400E | GeForce 9650M GS |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+308.9%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($5) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($20) |
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 Radeon HD 8400E and GeForce 9650M GS
Radeon HD 8400E
The Radeon HD 8400E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 5 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 1000 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 276 points. Launch price was $349.
GeForce 9650M GS
The GeForce 9650M GS is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 790 MHz to 835 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 270 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 8400E scores 276 and the GeForce 9650M GS reaches 270 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 8400E is built on GCN 1.0 while the GeForce 9650M GS uses Kepler, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,280 (Radeon HD 8400E) vs 768 (GeForce 9650M GS).
| Feature | Radeon HD 8400E | GeForce 9650M GS |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 276+2% | 270 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 1280+67% | 768 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 8400E | GeForce 9650M GS |
|---|---|---|
| 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)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | Radeon HD 8400E | GeForce 9650M GS |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 8400E draws 200W versus the GeForce 9650M GS's 30W — a 147.8% difference. The GeForce 9650M GS is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 8400E) vs 350W (GeForce 9650M GS). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs Legacy.
| Feature | Radeon HD 8400E | GeForce 9650M GS |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 200W | 30W-85% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | Legacy |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85°C |
| Perf/Watt | 1.4 | 9.0+543% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 8400E launched at $30 MSRP and currently averages $5, while the GeForce 9650M GS launched at $199 and now averages $20. The Radeon HD 8400E costs 75% less ($15 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 55.2 (Radeon HD 8400E) vs 13.5 (GeForce 9650M GS) — the Radeon HD 8400E offers 308.9% better value.
| Feature | Radeon HD 8400E | GeForce 9650M GS |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $30-85% | $199 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $5-75% | $20 |
| Performance per Dollar | 55.2+309% | 13.5 |
| Codename | Pitcairn | N13E-GE |
| Release | March 5 2012 | March 22 2012 |
| Ranking | #460 | #690 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 8400E and GeForce 9650M GS
