AMD Radeon RX 6400 vs NVIDIA GeForce 930A Comparison

The Verdict

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is the decisive winner in this comparison, and the data supports that conclusion without qualification. The recorded benchmark results show the RX 6400 outperforming the NVIDIA GeForce 930A by an enormous margin in the only shared test, Geekbench OpenCL, where it scores 32011 against 5317, a 502.1% advantage. The GeForce 930A, by contrast, is a much older, lower-end part with a single benchmark entry in the database, making any claim of competitiveness untenable.

The RX 6400 is the only sensible choice for anyone seeking actual graphics performance in a modern context. It belongs to the Radeon RX 6000 series, uses the RDNA 2.0 architecture, and was released in January 2022, whereas the GeForce 930A is from the Maxwell generation, released in March 2015. The RX 6400's average benchmark score of 6001 places it in the 35th percentile of all GPUs, while the 930A's average score of 5317 places it in the 31st percentile. Though the percentile gap appears small, the raw performance difference in the shared test is overwhelming.

For users constrained to the GeForce 930A, perhaps due to an existing portable device or legacy system, the data shows it remains a functional but severely limited part. Its only recorded benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL at 5317, sits close to its nearest rivals: the NVIDIA GeForce 840M at 5322 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M at 5308 (0.2% ahead), the NVIDIA GeForce 940M at 5284 (0.6% ahead), and the AMD Radeon R7 M445 at 5358 (0.8% behind). These deltas are all within 1%, meaning the 930A is essentially a peer of those older mobile parts, not a competitor to any modern discrete GPU.

The verdict is simple: the RX 6400 is the only choice for gaming, compute, or any graphics workload. The 930A should be considered only for basic display output on legacy hardware, not for performance.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different eras and design philosophies. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 is built on the RDNA 2.0 architecture using the Navi 24 chip, fabricated on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It packs 5,400 million transistors into a 107 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 50.5 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce 930A uses the Maxwell architecture with the GM108 chip, built on a 28 nm process, also at TSMC, but with only 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, for a density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The process node difference alone, 6 nm versus 28 nm, explains much of the performance gulf.

The RX 6400 features 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. It also includes 12 ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the 930A. The GeForce 930A has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs, with no ray tracing support. In terms of raw throughput, the RX 6400 delivers 3.565 TFLOPS of FP32 compute and 7.130 TFLOPS of FP16 (at a 2:1 ratio). The 930A manages just 722.7 GFLOPS of FP32 and has no recorded FP16 capability. Pixel rate and texture rate follow the same pattern: the RX 6400 achieves 74.27 GPixel/s and 111.4 GTexel/s, while the 930A reaches only 7.528 GPixel/s and 22.58 GTexel/s.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The RX 6400 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 128.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The 930A uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, providing just 16.02 GB/s, roughly one-eighth the bandwidth. The RX 6400's memory clock runs at 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective), while the 930A's memory runs at 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The RX 6400 draws up to 53 W TDP and is a single-slot card with no power connectors, while the 930A is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 33 W TDP and no power connectors, with display outputs described as "Portable Device Dependent."

API support also differs. The RX 6400 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 930A supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RX 6400's DirectX 12 Ultimate feature level is a meaningful advantage for modern games, while the 930A's 11_0 feature level is a legacy baseline. The RX 6400 uses a PCIe 4.0 x4 bus interface, whereas the 930A uses PCIe 3.0 x8.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in the shared benchmark?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6400 scores 32011 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930A scores 5317. The RX 6400 is 502.1% ahead.

Q: Does the GeForce 930A support ray tracing?

A: No. The GeForce 930A has no ray tracing cores recorded in the database. The RX 6400 includes 12 ray tracing cores.

Q: How much memory does each GPU have, and what type?

A: The RX 6400 has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 128.0 GB/s bandwidth. The 930A has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 16.02 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements?

A: The RX 6400 has a TDP of 53 W and requires a 250 W suggested PSU. The 930A has a TDP of 33 W and has no suggested PSU listed. Neither uses power connectors.

Q: Which GPU is more recent?

A: The RX 6400 was released on January 18, 2022. The GeForce 930A was released on March 12, 2015. Both are now end-of-life products.

Q: How close is the 930A to its nearest rivals?

A: The 930A's average score of 5317 is within 1% of the NVIDIA GeForce 840M (5322, 0.1% behind), NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M (5308, 0.2% ahead), NVIDIA GeForce 940M (5284, 0.6% ahead), and AMD Radeon R7 M445 (5358, 0.8% behind).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every measurable specification. The RX 6400 uses the Navi 24 chip on RDNA 2.0, while the 930A uses GM108 on Maxwell. The process node is 6 nm versus 28 nm, and the transistor count is 5,400 million versus 1,020 million, with die sizes of 107 mm² and 77 mm² respectively. Transistor density is 50.5 million per square millimeter versus 13.2 million.

Clock speeds differ substantially. The RX 6400 has a base clock of 1923 MHz, a boost clock of 2321 MHz, and a game clock of 2039 MHz. The 930A has a base clock of 928 MHz and a boost clock of 941 MHz, with no game clock listed. Memory clocks are 2000 MHz (16 Gbps effective) for the RX 6400 versus 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective) for the 930A.

Compute resources differ as well: 768 shading units versus 384, 48 TMUs versus 24, 32 ROPs versus 8, and 12 ray tracing cores versus none. The RX 6400 achieves 74.27 GPixel/s and 111.4 GTexel/s, while the 930A achieves 7.528 GPixel/s and 22.58 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 3.565 TFLOPS versus 722.7 GFLOPS. The RX 6400 has FP16 at 7.130 TFLOPS (2:1), while the 930A has no recorded FP16 value.

Memory configuration differs: 4 GB GDDR6 versus 2 GB DDR3, both on a 64-bit bus, but with 128.0 GB/s versus 16.02 GB/s bandwidth. TDP is 53 W versus 33 W. The RX 6400 is single-slot with no power connectors and a 250 W suggested PSU; the 930A is an IGP with no power connectors and no suggested PSU. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x4 versus PCIe 3.0 x8. Display outputs are 1x HDMI 2.1 and 1x DisplayPort 1.4a for the RX 6400, versus "Portable Device Dependent" for the 930A. DirectX support is 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus 12 (11_0). The RX 6400's launch MSRP was 159 USD; the 930A has no recorded launch MSRP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains only one shared benchmark between the two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The AMD Radeon RX 6400 scores 32011, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930A scores 5317. The delta is 502.1%, meaning the RX 6400 delivers more than six times the OpenCL performance of the 930A. This is not a marginal win; it is a generational obliteration.

The RX 6400 also has a much richer benchmark profile overall. Beyond the shared test, the RX 6400 has recorded scores in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (176), Geekbench Vulkan (16372), Passmark DirectX 10 (54), Passmark DirectX 11 (70), Passmark DirectX 12 (30), Passmark DirectX 9 (93), Passmark G2D (722), Passmark G3D (7673), and Passmark GPU Compute (2812). The 930A has no scores in any of these tests, meaning its overall capability cannot be assessed beyond the single OpenCL result.

The average benchmark score reinforces the gap: the RX 6400 averages 6001, while the 930A averages 5317. The RX 6400's nearest rivals in the database are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M (6000, 0% delta), NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Server (5996, 0.1% ahead), AMD FirePro W4100 (5987, 0.2% ahead), and NVIDIA Quadro K4000M (5986, 0.3% ahead). These are all within a fraction of a percent of the RX 6400's average, showing the RX 6400 sits in a tight cluster of mid-range legacy parts. The 930A, by contrast, sits among older mobile chips like the GeForce 840M and GeForce 940M.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon RX 6400 wins in every category where data exists. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark, Geekbench OpenCL, by 502.1%. It wins on raw compute, memory bandwidth, pixel rate, texture rate, and API feature support. It has ray tracing cores, which the 930A lacks entirely. It supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the 930A is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0). It has double the memory capacity (4 GB versus 2 GB) and eight times the memory bandwidth (128.0 GB/s versus 16.02 GB/s). It is built on a 6 nm process versus 28 nm, giving it a transistor density nearly four times higher.

The NVIDIA GeForce 930A's only advantage is its lower TDP: 33 W versus 53 W. This makes it suitable for power-constrained portable devices, which aligns with its "IGP" slot width and "Portable Device Dependent" display outputs. It also has no suggested PSU requirement, making it easier to integrate into low-power systems. However, this advantage comes at the cost of virtually all performance. The 930A's FP32 compute of 722.7 GFLOPS is roughly one-fifth of the RX 6400's 3.565 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 7.528 GPixel/s is about one-tenth of the RX 6400's 74.27 GPixel/s.

For gaming, content creation, or any compute workload, the RX 6400 is the only viable option. For legacy display output in a portable device where performance is irrelevant and power draw is paramount, the 930A may technically function, but the data offers no scenario where it outperforms the RX 6400 in any measured benchmark. The RX 6400 also benefits from a modern bus interface (PCIe 4.0 x4) and a single-slot form factor with standard display outputs, making it a drop-in solution for desktop systems. The 930A, as an IGP, is tied to the device it ships in and offers no upgrade path.

In summary, the RX 6400 wins 1 head-to-head benchmark out of 1, and the 930A wins 0. The verdict is unambiguous: choose the RX 6400 for any performance-oriented task.