AMD Radeon RX 7700 vs NVIDIA T400 4 GB Comparison

The NVIDIA T400 4 GB and AMD Radeon RX 7700 occupy vastly different corners of the GPU market. The T400 is a 30 W, single-slot professional card built for basic multi-display setups, while the RX 7700 is a 200 W dual-slot gaming and compute monster. Benchmark data shows the RX 7700 delivering over six times the OpenCL performance, but the T400 still holds relevance for specific low-power, legacy workstation tasks.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a single head-to-head benchmark result: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon RX 7700 wins this outright with a score of 106,028, against 17,320 for the NVIDIA T400, a delta of -83.7% from the perspective of the T400. This means the RX 7700 is not just faster; it is in a different performance class entirely.

For the RX 7700, its wins extend beyond that single comparison. Its PassMark G3D score of 20,974 and PassMark GPU Compute score of 10,963 indicate strong general 3D rendering and compute workloads. It also carries a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 2,865, which reflects modern DirectX 12 gaming capability. The T400, by contrast, has no DirectX 12-specific benchmark in the fact pack, and its only other benchmark is Geekbench Vulkan at 16,263.

The T400 wins in the categories that do not appear in benchmark scores: power draw and physical footprint. With a 30 W TDP and no power connectors, it can run in virtually any PCIe slot without additional cabling. The RX 7700 requires dual 8-pin connectors and a 550 W suggested PSU, making it unsuitable for low-power or legacy systems. In terms of benchmark victories, the RX 7700 takes the only head-to-head test, but the T400 wins on deployment flexibility.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap is generational. The NVIDIA T400 uses the TU117 chip built on Turing architecture, fabricated on TSMC’s 12 nm process. It contains 4,700 million transistors on a 200 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5 million per mm². The AMD RX 7700 uses the Navi 32 chip on RDNA 3.0 architecture, built on TSMC’s 5 nm process. This die packs 28,100 million transistors into 346 mm², for a density of 81.2 million per mm². The RX 7700’s process node is two generations ahead and more than three times denser.

The shader configuration differs massively. The T400 has 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 16 raster output pipelines. The RX 7700 has 2,560 shading units, 160 TMUs, and 96 ROPs. Additionally, the RX 7700 features 40 ray tracing cores, a capability entirely absent from the T400. Neither card lists tensor cores, so the AI-acceleration features are not part of this comparison.

Memory architecture is another differentiator. The T400 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 80.00 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 7700 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, with 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth. That is roughly 7.8 times the memory bandwidth, which directly impacts high-resolution textures and compute workloads. The RX 7700’s memory clock is 2438 MHz (19.5 Gbps effective) versus the T400’s 1250 MHz (10 Gbps effective).

The T400 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RX 7700 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both offer OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 7700 also uses PCIe 4.0 x16 versus the T400’s PCIe 3.0 x16, doubling the potential bus bandwidth for data transfers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only shared benchmark in the fact pack is Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD RX 7700 scores 106,028, while the NVIDIA T400 scores 17,320. The delta is -83.7% for the T400, meaning the RX 7700 is approximately 512% faster in this test. This is not a marginal victory; it is a complete rout.

Breaking down the RX 7700’s other benchmarks provides context for its overall capability. Its PassMark G3D score of 20,974 is roughly 23 times higher than its PassMark DirectX 9 score of 261, indicating that the card scales well with modern APIs. The PassMark DirectX 11 score of 186 and DirectX 12 score of 96 are lower than the DirectX 9 score, which is unusual but reflects the specific workload patterns of those tests. The PassMark G2D score of 1,206 shows competent 2D performance, while the GPU Compute score of 10,963 confirms strong compute throughput.

For the T400, the Geekbench Vulkan score of 16,263 is close to its OpenCL score of 17,320, suggesting consistent performance across different compute APIs. Its average benchmark score is 16,792, which places it in the 60th percentile of all GPUs. The RX 7700’s average benchmark score is 15,852, ironically lower than the T400’s average, but this is due to the different sets of benchmarks run on each card. The RX 7700’s percentile rank is 58, slightly below the T400’s 60, despite its overwhelming OpenCL win. This highlights that percentile ranks depend on the specific benchmark suite and comparison pool.

Specification Differences

The spec sheets diverge on nearly every measurable parameter. The T400 has a base clock of 420 MHz and a boost clock of 1425 MHz. The RX 7700 has a base clock of 1900 MHz, a game clock of 2041 MHz, and a boost clock of 2459 MHz. The RX 7700’s boost clock is over 1 GHz higher.

Memory capacity and bandwidth favor the RX 7700 overwhelmingly: 16 GB vs 4 GB, 256-bit vs 64-bit bus, and 624.1 GB/s vs 80.00 GB/s. The compute rates follow suit. The RX 7700 delivers 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 and 25.18 TFLOPS FP16 (1:1 ratio), while the T400 delivers 1,094.4 GFLOPS FP32 and 2.189 TFLOPS FP16 (2:1 ratio). The RX 7700 is roughly 23 times faster in FP32.

Pixel and texture rates reflect the same disparity. The RX 7700 achieves 236.1 GPixel/s and 393.4 GTexel/s, versus the T400’s 22.80 GPixel/s and 34.20 GTexel/s. Power consumption is the inverse story: the T400 draws 30 W with no external power connectors and a 200 W suggested PSU, while the RX 7700 draws 200 W, requires two 8-pin connectors, and needs a 550 W suggested PSU.

Physical dimensions also differ. The RX 7700 is 267 mm long, 135 mm high, and 50 mm wide, occupying a dual-slot form factor. The T400 is single-slot with no listed dimensions, emphasizing its compact profile. Display outputs differ: the T400 has three mini-DisplayPort 1.4a connectors, while the RX 7700 offers one HDMI 2.1a, two DisplayPort 2.1, and one USB Type-C.

The T400 was released on May 5, 2021, and is end-of-life, with a predecessor of Quadro Volta and successor of Workstation Ampere. The RX 7700 was released on September 17, 2025, is still active, and its predecessor is Navi II with successor Navi IV. Neither card has a listed launch MSRP in the fact pack.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL compute?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 7700 is decisively faster, scoring 106,028 in Geekbench OpenCL versus the NVIDIA T400’s 17,320, a delta of -83.7% for the T400.

Q: Can the NVIDIA T400 run modern DirectX 12 games?

A: The T400 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), but its performance is limited. It has no 3DMark DirectX 12 benchmark score in the data, and its FP32 compute is only 1,094.4 GFLOPS, making it unsuitable for demanding gaming workloads.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The T400 has a 30 W TDP and needs no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 200 W. The RX 7700 has a 200 W TDP, requires two 8-pin connectors, and needs a 550 W suggested PSU.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card provide?

A: The RX 7700 provides 624.1 GB/s from 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus. The T400 provides 80.00 GB/s from 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus. The RX 7700 has roughly 7.8 times the bandwidth.

Q: Does the RX 7700 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RX 7700 features 40 ray tracing cores. The T400 has no RT cores listed, so it lacks dedicated hardware ray tracing support.

Q: Which card has a higher percentile rank among all GPUs?

A: The T400 has a percentile rank of 60, while the RX 7700 has a rank of 58. Despite the RX 7700’s far higher raw performance in OpenCL, the T400’s benchmark set and comparison pool place it slightly higher in percentile terms.

The Verdict

The data points to an obvious choice for anyone needing raw performance: the AMD Radeon RX 7700. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 106,028 dwarfs the T400’s 17,320, and its 25.18 TFLOPS FP32 compute is over 23 times higher. If you need 16 GB of memory, 624.1 GB/s of bandwidth, ray tracing, or modern DirectX 12 Ultimate support, the RX 7700 is the only option here.

However, the NVIDIA T400 has a legitimate role. Its 30 W power draw, lack of power connectors, and single-slot design make it ideal for legacy systems, basic multi-display output, or environments where power and space are constrained. The suggested PSU of 200 W means it can slot into pre-existing office machines without upgrades. Its Turing architecture and 4 GB of GDDR6 are sufficient for 2D workloads, light CAD, or as a display adapter for three mini-DisplayPort monitors.

For a gamer or compute user, the RX 7700 is the clear winner. For an IT administrator needing a low-profile, low-power card for workstation displays, the T400 remains practical. The benchmarks are not close, but the intended use cases are equally far apart.