ERROR: No GPU found with the ID:8400

getGPUInfos: Perhaps the translation is missing or the German GPU is not selected in the page header (or a wrong one is selected) NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS vs vs Vivante GC1000+ Dual-Core
Notebookcheck Logo

NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS vs vs Vivante GC1000+ Dual-Core

NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS

► remove from comparison NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS

NVidia GeForce 8400M GS is the DirectX 10 capable successor of the GeForce Go 7400 for laptops and technologically a slower 8400M GT video card (because of the smaller 64 Bit memory bus). The performance is slightly above the 7400 and, therefore, it can represent current (not very demanding) games fluently with reduced details / resolutions. Demanding games like Crysis can only be run in very low details and resolutions. For people who play occasionally, it may be sufficient.

The particularity of this video card are the "Unified Shader". Pixel- and vertex-shaders do not exist any more but 16 of the so called stream processors do the graphic work.

One advantage of the GeForce 8000 series is the integrated PureVideo video processor. It can support the CPU in decoding H.264, VC-1, MPEG2, and WMV9 encoded videos in HD quality > PureVideo Product Comparison

Compared to desktop cards, the 8400M GS can be compared to the 8400 GS which has a 50 MHz higher core clock (and is therefore a bit faster).

► remove from comparison

Vivante GC1000+ Dual-Core

► remove from comparison Vivante Vivante GC1000+ Dual-Core

The Vivante GC1000+ Dual-Core is an integrated graphics card for ARM based SoCs. It supports Android, Windows Mobile 6, Windows CE and Linux and the standards OpenGL ES 2.0, OpenGL 2.1, OpenVG 1.1, and DirectX 11 (9_3). The chip is can be clocked with up to 600 MHz (28nm LP) or 800 MHz (28nm HPM). The theoretical calculating power of the GPU is 50 Mio triangles / s, 650 Mio pixels / s and 12 GFLOPS (according to cnx-software.com). According to Vivante however the GC1000 is capable of 345 to 460 Mio triangles /s and 11 to 15 GFLOPS.

show full text
NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GSVivante GC1000+ Dual-Core
Series
GeForce 8400M GT 16 @ 0.45 GHz128 Bit @ 600 MHz
GeForce 8400M GS 16 @ 0.4 GHz64 Bit @ 600 MHz
GeForce 8400M G 8 @ 0.4 GHz64 Bit @ 600 MHz
Vivante GC1000+ Dual-Core 2 @ 0.6 GHz
GC800 1 @ 0.32 - 0.58 GHz
Extreme Graphics 2 @ 0.13 GHz
PXP
unknown
CodenameG86M
Pipelines16 - unified2 - unified
Core Speed400 MHz600 / 800 MHz
Shader Speed800 MHz
Memory Speed600 MHz
Memory Bus Width64 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR2 / GDDR3
Max. Amount of Memory256 MB
Shared Memorynono
APIDirectX 10, Shader 4.0DirectX 9_3, OpenGL 2.1 / ES 2.0
Power Consumption11 Watt
Transistors210 Million
technology80 nm
Features800 MHZ Shader-Taktfrequenz, PureVideo Technologie (H.264, VC-1, MPEG2, WMV9 Decodierbeschleunigung), HDCP-fähig, PowerMizer 7.0 Energieverwaltung (dynamisches umschalten zwischen Leistung und Energiesparen), HDR (High Dynamic-Range Lighting), designed für Windows Vista, 16x Vollbild AA, 16x winkelunabhängiges AF, 128-Bit HDR Ausleuchtung mit AA, PCI-E 16x, OpenGL 2.1, Gigathread Technologie
Date of Announcement09.05.2007 12.09.2013
Link to Manufacturer Pagewww.nvidia.de

Benchmarks

3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Unlimited Graphics
min: 2237     avg: 2329     median: 2373 (0%)     max: 2377 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Extreme Graphics
min: 997     avg: 1177     median: 1207.5 (0%)     max: 1295 Points
3DMark - 3DMark Ice Storm Graphics
min: 1912     avg: 2310     median: 2255 (0%)     max: 2694 Points
3DMark 2001SE - 3DMark 2001 - Standard
min: 10921     avg: 12724     median: 12521.5 (13%)     max: 15120 Points
3DMark 03 - 3DMark 03 - Standard
min: 4199     avg: 4798     median: 4852.5 (3%)     max: 5434 Points
3DMark 05 - 3DMark 05 - Standard
min: 1938     avg: 2671     median: 2895 (3%)     max: 3213 Points
3DMark 06 3DMark 06 - Score Unknown Settings + NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS
3DMark 06
min: 1066     avg: 1327     median: 1298.5 (2%)     max: 1645 Points
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x1024 + NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS
3DMark 06
min: 1099     avg: 1326     median: 1343 (2%)     max: 1527 Points
3DMark 06 - Standard 1280x800 + NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS
3DMark 06
min: 1105     avg: 1447     median: 1507 (2%)     max: 1623 Points
3DMark 06 - Standard 1024x768 + NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS
3DMark 06
min: 1208     avg: 1383     median: 1382.5 (2%)     max: 1557 Points
Windows Vista Experience Index - Windows Vista Leistungsindex - Grafik (Spiele)
min: 4.3     avg: 4.5     median: 4.5 (65%)     max: 4.6 Points
Windows Vista Experience Index - Windows Vista Leistungsindex - Grafik
min: 3.1     avg: 3.3     median: 3.3 (49%)     max: 3.5 Points
Cinebench R10 Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit) + NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Shading (32bit)
min: 2056     avg: 2127     median: 2128.5 (2%)     max: 2193 Points
GFXBench 3.0 - GFXBench 3.0 Manhattan Offscreen
0 fps (0%)
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7
GFXBench T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16 + Vivante GC1000+ Dual-Core
GFXBench (DX / GLBenchmark) 2.7 - GFXBench T-Rex HD Offscreen C24Z16
min: 2.5     avg: 2.8     median: 2.7 (0%)     max: 3.3 fps
AnTuTu 3DRating - Antutu 3DRating Off-screen
1651 Points (57%)
AnTuTu 3DRating - Antutu 3DRating Score
4981 Points (44%)
AnTuTu v3 - AnTuTu v3 GPU
5503 Points (57%)
Basemark ES 2.0 - Basemark ES 2.0
min: 13.87     avg: 18     median: 20.1 (33%)     max: 20.09 fps
Basemark X 1.0 - Basemark X 1.0 Off-Screen
min: 1.246     avg: 1.8     median: 1.8 (8%)     max: 2.262 fps
NenaMark2 - NenaMark2 Score
min: 38.2     avg: 48.8     median: 49.5 (74%)     max: 58 fps
PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1 - PerformanceTest Mobile V1 2D Graphics Tests
min: 1549     avg: 1910     median: 1798 (2%)     max: 2667 Points
PassMark PerformanceTest Mobile V1 - PerformanceTest Mobile V1 3D Graphics Tests
min: 682     avg: 707     median: 688 (1%)     max: 753 Points
Smartbench 2012 - Smartbench 2012 Gaming Index
min: 1832     avg: 2304     median: 2322 (50%)     max: 2758 Points

Average Benchmarks NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS → 0% n=

Average Benchmarks Vivante GC1000+ Dual-Core → 0% n=

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Game Benchmarks

The following benchmarks stem from our benchmarks of review laptops. The performance depends on the used graphics memory, clock rate, processor, system settings, drivers, and operating systems. So the results don't have to be representative for all laptops with this GPU. For detailed information on the benchmark results, click on the fps number.

Command and Conquer III

Command and Conquer III

2007
high 1024x768
100%
GeForce 8400M GS:
16  fps
F.E.A.R.

F.E.A.R.

2005
low 640x480
100%
GeForce 8400M GS:
137 162 233 240 250 252 281 283 289 300 300 305 ~ 253 fps
med. 800x600
100%
GeForce 8400M GS:
46 47 48 49 52 52 52 54 55 55 56 57 ~ 52 fps
high 1024x768
100%
GeForce 8400M GS:
12 12 13 13 14 14 14 15 15 16 16 29 ~ 15 fps
Doom 3

Doom 3

2004
low 640x480
100%
GeForce 8400M GS:
65.2 83.5 87 93.4 98.3 ~ 85 fps
med. 640x480
100%
GeForce 8400M GS:
63 65.1 67.8 82.1 100.3 ~ 76 fps
high 800x600
100%
GeForce 8400M GS:
44.2 50.9 57 59.8 65.1 ~ 55 fps
ultra 1024x768
100%
GeForce 8400M GS:
27.6 27.6 32.8 36.5 40.8 ~ 33 fps
Quake 3 Arena - Timedemo

Quake 3 Arena - Timedemo

1999
high 1024x768
100%
GeForce 8400M GS:
107.4 122 127 143.8 175.4 192 199.1 221 223 231 234.2 ~ 180 fps

Average Gaming NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GS → 100%

Average Gaming 30-70 fps → 100%

NVIDIA GeForce 8400M GSlowmed.highultraQHD4K
Command and Conquer III16
F.E.A.R.2535215
Doom 385765533
Quake 3 Arena - Timedemo180
< 30 fps
< 60 fps
< 120 fps
≥ 120 fps

1
1
1
1
2
1

1
1







For more games that might be playable and a list of all games and graphics cards visit our Gaming List

v1.26
log 24. 10:36:12

#0 checking url part for id 82 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 8400 +0s ... 0s

#2 checking url part for id 4572 +0s ... 0s

#3 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#4 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Mon, 22 Apr 2024 05:40:21 +0200 +0.001s ... 0.001s

#5 composed specs +0.132s ... 0.133s

#6 did output specs +0s ... 0.133s

#7 start showIntegratedCPUs +0s ... 0.133s

#8 getting avg benchmarks for device 82 +0.04s ... 0.173s

#9 got single benchmarks 82 +0.058s ... 0.231s

#10 getting avg benchmarks for device 8400 +0.002s ... 0.233s

#11 got single benchmarks 8400 +0.001s ... 0.234s

#12 getting avg benchmarks for device 4572 +0.001s ... 0.235s

#13 got single benchmarks 4572 +0.016s ... 0.251s

#14 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.251s

#15 No cached benchmark found, getting uncached values +0.318s ... 0.569s

#16 min, max, avg, median took s +0.018s ... 0.587s

#17 before gaming benchmark output +0s ... 0.587s

#18 Got 68 rows for game benchmarks. +0.008s ... 0.596s

#19 composed SQL query for gamebenchmarks +0s ... 0.596s

#20 got data and put it in $dataArray +0.002s ... 0.598s

#21 benchmarks composed for output. +0.01s ... 0.608s

#22 calculated avg scores. +0s ... 0.608s

#23 return log +0.002s ... 0.61s

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Expert Reviews and News on Laptops, Smartphones and Tech Innovations > Benchmarks / Tech > Graphics Card Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2023-07- 1)