FR- Home page
-
Graphics card - Comparison
AMD Radeon HD 8400 Mobile vs ATI Radeon HD 3870
Comparison of the technical characteristics between the graphics cards, with AMD Radeon HD 8400 Mobile on one side and ATI Radeon HD 3870 on the other side. The first is dedicated to the laptop sector, it has 128 shading units, a maximum frequency of 0.6 GHz, its lithography is 28 nm. The second is used on the desktop segment, it includes 320 shading units, a maximum frequency of 0.8 GHz, its lithography is 55 nm. The following table also compares the boost clock, the number of shading units (if indicated), of execution units, the amount of cache memory, the maximum memory capacity, the memory bus width, the release date, the number of PCIe lanes, the values obtained in various benchmarks.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.
Specification comparison:
| Graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 8400 Mobile | ATI Radeon HD 3870 | ||||||
| Market (main) | Laptop | Desktop | ||||||
| Release date | Q4 2013 | Q4 2007 | ||||||
| Model number | Radeon HD 8400 Mobile | RV670 | ||||||
| GPU name | Kalindi | Cedar | ||||||
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | TeraScale | ||||||
| Generation | Kabini HD 8000 | Radeon R600 HD 3800 | ||||||
| Lithography | 28 nm | 55 nm | ||||||
| Transistors | 1,178,000,000 | 666,000,000 | ||||||
| Bus interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 | ||||||
| GPU base clock | 600 MHz | 777 MHz | ||||||
| GPU boost clock | 600 MHz | 777 MHz | ||||||
| TDP | 25 W | 106 W | ||||||
| Cores (compute units, SM, SMX) | 2 | 4 | ||||||
| Shading units | 128 | 320 | ||||||
| TMUs | 8 | 16 | ||||||
| ROPs | 4 | 16 | ||||||
| Cache memory | - | 256 KB | ||||||
| Pixel fillrate | 2.4 GP/s | 12.4 GP/s | ||||||
| Texture fillrate | 4.8 GT/s | 12.4 GT/s | ||||||
| Performance FP32 (float) | 153.6 GFLOPS | 497.3 GFLOPS | ||||||
| Performance FP64 (double) | 9.6 GFLOPS | 99.5 GFLOPS | ||||||
| Amazon |  |
|
||||||
| eBay |  |
|
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.
We can better compare what are the technical differences between the two graphics cards.
Performance comparison with the benchmarks:
Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench 4.
| FP32 Performance in GFLOPS | |
|---|---|
ATI Radeon HD 3870 |
497.3 |
| AMD Radeon HD 8400 Mobile |
153.6 |
The difference is 224%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these graphics cards, you may get different results.
average of the performances got with these graphics cards, you may get different results.
Single precision floating point format, also known as FP32, is a computer number format that typically occupies 32 bits in PC memory. This represents a wide dynamic range of numeric values that employs a floating point.
Processors with the graphics card AMD Radeon HD 8400 Mobile:
AMD A6-5200Equivalence:
AMD Radeon HD 8400 Mobile Nvidia equivalentATI Radeon HD 3870 Nvidia equivalentDisclaimer:
When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
This page includes affiliate links for which the administrator of GadgetVersus may earn a commission at no extra cost to you should you make a purchase. These links are indicated using the hashtag #ad.
Information:
We do not assume any responsibility for the data displayed on our website. Please use at your own risk. Some or all of this data may be out of date or incomplete, please refer to the technical page on the respective manufacturer's website to find the latest up-to-date information regarding the specifics of these products.