AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP vs NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP and NVIDIA Quadro 2000M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps).

AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP

NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

Differences

Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP

Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 10 month(s) later
A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
2.2x lower typical power consumption: 25 Watt vs 55 Watt
2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 18.197 vs 8.306
4.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1322.192 vs 272.707
2.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.774 vs 0.855
3.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 47.241 vs 14.423
8.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 224.569 vs 27.158

Specifications (specs)
Launch date	23 November 2013 vs 13 January 2011
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm vs 40 nm
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	25 Watt vs 55 Watt
Benchmarks
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	18.197 vs 8.306
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1322.192 vs 272.707
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	1.774 vs 0.855
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	47.241 vs 14.423
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	224.569 vs 27.158

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

Around 38% higher core clock speed: 550 MHz vs 400 MHz
5.5x more texture fill rate: 17.6 GTexel / s vs 3.2 GTexel / s
Around 50% higher pipelines: 192 vs 128
4.1x better floating-point performance: 422.4 gflops vs 102.4 gflops
3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 782 vs 262
3x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 231 vs 78
2.8x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3414 vs 1205
2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1926 vs 930
Around 58% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 2569 vs 1631
2.1x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1926 vs 930
Around 58% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 2569 vs 1631

Specifications (specs)
Core clock speed	550 MHz vs 400 MHz
Texture fill rate	17.6 GTexel / s vs 3.2 GTexel / s
Pipelines	192 vs 128
Floating-point performance	422.4 gflops vs 102.4 gflops
Benchmarks
PassMark - G3D Mark	782 vs 262
PassMark - G2D Mark	231 vs 78
Geekbench - OpenCL	3414 vs 1205
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	1926 vs 930
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	2569 vs 1631
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	1926 vs 930
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	2569 vs 1631

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP
GPU 2: NVIDIA Quadro 2000M

PassMark - G3D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

262

782

PassMark - G2D Mark

GPU 1

GPU 2

231

Geekbench - OpenCL

GPU 1

GPU 2

1205

3414

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

18.197

8.306

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

1322.192

272.707

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

1.774

0.855

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

47.241

14.423

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)

GPU 1

GPU 2

224.569

27.158

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

930

1926

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)

GPU 1

GPU 2

1631

2569

GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

930

1926

GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)

GPU 1

GPU 2

1631

2569

Name	AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP	NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
PassMark - G3D Mark	262	782
PassMark - G2D Mark	78	231
Geekbench - OpenCL	1205	3414
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	18.197	8.306
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	1322.192	272.707
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	1.774	0.855
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	47.241	14.423
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	224.569	27.158
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	930	1926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	1631	2569
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	930	1926
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	1631	2569
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)		1261
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)		1261

Compare specifications (specs)

	AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP	NVIDIA Quadro 2000M
Essentials
Architecture	GCN 2.0	Fermi
Code name	Kalindi	GF106
Launch date	23 November 2013	13 January 2011
Place in performance rating	1353	1347
Type	Desktop	Mobile workstation
Launch price (MSRP)		$46.56
Price now		$46.56
Value for money (0-100)		25.92
Technical info
Core clock speed	400 MHz	550 MHz
Floating-point performance	102.4 gflops	422.4 gflops
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Pipelines	128	192
Texture fill rate	3.2 GTexel / s	17.6 GTexel / s
Thermal Design Power (TDP)	25 Watt	55 Watt
Transistor count	1,178 million	1,170 million
Video outputs and ports
Display Connectors	No outputs	No outputs
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements
Interface	IGP	MXM-A (3.0)
Laptop size		medium sized
API support
DirectX	12.0 (12_0)	12.0 (11_0)
OpenGL	4.5	4.6
Memory
Memory type	System Shared	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount		2 GB
Memory bandwidth		28.8 GB / s
Memory bus width		128 Bit
Memory clock speed		1800 MHz
Shared memory		0