GPU Comparison
AMD Radeon HD 8730M
RTX A400
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD Radeon HD 8730M vs NVIDIA RTX A400
FAQ
Q: How do the two GPUs compare in overall benchmark performance?
A: The NVIDIA RTX A400 has an average benchmark score of 6078, while the AMD Radeon HD 8730M scores 5955. The RTX A400 sits at the 35th percentile of all GPUs, with the HD 8730M just behind at the 34th percentile.
Q: Which GPU wins in the only shared benchmark test?
A: In Geekbench OpenCL, the RTX A400 scores 22844 versus the HD 8730M's 5955. That represents a 283.6% advantage for the NVIDIA card, making it the clear winner in that test.
Q: How does each GPU compare to its nearest competitors?
A: The RTX A400's closest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce MX230 at 6077 (0% delta), with the Intel Iris Pro Graphics 6200 at 6117 (-0.6%) and AMD Radeon 760M at 6019 (1%). The HD 8730M's nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro K620M at 5957 (0%), followed by the AMD Radeon HD 8750M at 5970 (-0.3%) and Intel UHD Graphics 730 at 5929 (0.4%).
Q: What are the architectural generations of these two GPUs?
A: The RTX A400 uses the Ampere architecture on an 8nm Samsung process, while the HD 8730M uses the older GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28nm TSMC process. The RTX A400 is from the Workstation Ampere (Ax000) generation, and the HD 8730M belongs to the Solar System (HD 8700M) generation.
Q: What is the production status of each GPU?
A: The RTX A400 is listed as Active in production, having been released in April 2024. The HD 8730M is End-of-life, with a release date in March 2013. The RTX A400's predecessor is Quadro Turing, while the HD 8730M's predecessor is London.
Q: Which GPU has higher memory bandwidth?
A: The RTX A400 offers 96.00 GB/s bandwidth from 4GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. The HD 8730M provides only 28.80 GB/s from 2GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus. The RTX A400's bandwidth is more than three times higher despite the narrower bus.
Architecture Differences
The NVIDIA RTX A400 and AMD Radeon HD 8730M represent vastly different eras of GPU design. The RTX A400 is built on Ampere architecture using an 8nm process at Samsung, packing 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die. That yields a transistor density of 43.5M per mm². The HD 8730M, by contrast, uses GCN 1.0 architecture on a 28nm process at TSMC, with just 950 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, for a density of 12.3M per mm².
The compute core counts differ dramatically. The RTX A400 features 768 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. It also includes 6 dedicated ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores, bringing modern accelerated workloads to the table. The HD 8730M has 384 shading units and 24 TMUs but only 8 ROPs. It has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores at all.
Clock speeds tell part of the story. The RTX A400 runs at a base of 1417 MHz with a boost of 1762 MHz, while the HD 8730M operates at just 650 MHz base and 700 MHz boost. Memory clocks follow the same pattern: the RTX A400 uses 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) GDDR6, while the HD 8730M uses 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) DDR3.
The feature sets reflect their respective generations. The RTX A400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The HD 8730M supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RTX A400 also uses the newer PCIe 4.0 x8 interface, whereas the HD 8730M is limited to PCIe 3.0 x8.
The RTX A400 is a single-slot card measuring 163 mm in length and 69 mm in height, with no power connectors required. It offers four mini-DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The HD 8730M's dimensions and display outputs are not specified in the data.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
Only one benchmark test appears in both GPUs' result sets: Geekbench OpenCL. In that test, the NVIDIA RTX A400 delivers a score of 22844. The AMD Radeon HD 8730M manages 5955. The delta is a staggering 283.6% in favor of the RTX A400. This is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational leap in raw compute throughput.
To put that score in context, the RTX A400's average benchmark score of 6078 is just 2.1% above the HD 8730M's 5955. But the Geekbench OpenCL result shows how much the RTX A400 excels specifically in OpenCL compute workloads. The RTX A400 also has a Geekbench Vulkan score of 22237, though the HD 8730M has no comparable Vulkan result.
The RTX A400's other benchmark results include Passmark DirectX 10 at 32, DirectX 11 at 37, DirectX 12 at 27, and DirectX 9 at 87. Its Passmark G2D score is 899, G3D is 5983, and GPU compute is 2557. The HD 8730M has none of these scores recorded, limiting the comparison to that single OpenCL data point.
The RTX A400's nearest rivals in the database average around 6000-6100 in score. The HD 8730M's nearest rivals cluster tightly around 5950-5980. Both GPUs sit near the 34-35th percentile of all GPUs, indicating they are mid-to-low tier performers in the broader GPU landscape. The delta between the two in average score is small, but the OpenCL test reveals where the RTX A400's architecture provides a decisive advantage.
Specification Differences
The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The RTX A400 uses an 8nm Samsung process, while the HD 8730M uses 28nm TSMC. Transistor counts are 8,700 million versus 950 million. Die size is 200 mm² versus 77 mm². Transistor density is 43.5M/mm² versus 12.3M/mm².
Memory configurations diverge sharply. The RTX A400 has 4GB GDDR6 with a 64-bit bus and 96.00 GB/s bandwidth. The HD 8730M has 2GB DDR3 with a 128-bit bus and 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX A400's memory clock is 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective), while the HD 8730M's is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective).
Compute resources differ in every category. Shading units: 768 versus 384. TMUs: 24 versus 24 (same). ROPs: 16 versus 8. RT cores: 6 versus none. Tensor cores: 24 versus none. Pixel rate: 28.19 GPixel/s versus 5.600 GPixel/s. Texture rate: 42.29 GTexel/s versus 16.80 GTexel/s. FP32 performance: 2.706 TFLOPS versus 537.6 GFLOPS. The RTX A400 also has FP16 at 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1), while the HD 8730M has no listed FP16 capability.
Clock speeds show the RTX A400 running at 1417 MHz base and 1762 MHz boost, versus 650 MHz base and 700 MHz boost for the HD 8730M. The RTX A400 has a TDP of 50W, while the HD 8730M has no TDP listed. The RTX A400 is single-slot with no power connectors and a 250W suggested PSU; the HD 8730M has no slot width, power connector, or PSU data.
Bus interfaces differ: PCIe 4.0 x8 for the RTX A400, PCIe 3.0 x8 for the HD 8730M. API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus DirectX 12 (11_1), with both at OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170. Production status: Active versus End-of-life. Release dates: April 2024 versus March 2013.
The Verdict
The data paints a clear picture: the NVIDIA RTX A400 is the stronger GPU in every measurable category. Its 283.6% advantage in Geekbench OpenCL is decisive, and its architectural features, ray tracing cores, tensor cores, higher FP32 throughput, and faster memory, make it suitable for modern workstation workloads. The HD 8730M, released in 2013 and now end-of-life, cannot compete on compute performance or feature support.
For users needing modern API compatibility, the RTX A400's DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 support matter. The HD 8730M's DirectX 12 (11_1) and Vulkan 1.2.170 are older and more limited. The RTX A400 also offers 4GB GDDR6 memory versus 2GB DDR3, which affects texture-heavy and large-dataset workloads.
The RTX A400's active production status and 2024 release date mean it remains a viable current product. The HD 8730M's end-of-life status makes it a legacy part. The RTX A400's 50W TDP and no power connector requirement suggest efficiency, though no comparable TDP data exists for the HD 8730M.
For compute-intensive tasks where OpenCL performance matters, there is no contest, the RTX A400 is the pick. The data shows a generational gap in both architecture and execution. The HD 8730M's only advantage is its 128-bit memory bus, which provides a wider path, but the much lower bandwidth and older memory type negate that benefit. The RTX A400 is the recommended choice for any current or forward-looking application. The HD 8730M belongs in legacy systems only, where its older API support and lower power envelope might suffice for basic tasks.