AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP

The AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP is a 28 nm integrated graphics processor built on the GCN 2.0 architecture, using the Kalindi chip and featuring 128 shading units, 8 texture mapping units, and 4 raster output pipes. It operates with a system-shared memory interface, meaning its bandwidth and capacity are entirely dependent on the host system's RAM configuration, and it carries a 25 W thermal design power. The part is classified as end-of-life, having launched on 2013-11-22T17:00:00.000Z, and its benchmark percentile versus all GPUs sits at 50, indicating it lands exactly at the median of the database's tracked graphics solutions. The IGP supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170, though its memory subsystem and display outputs are both motherboard dependent.

Who Should Consider It

The AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP is positioned for users who require basic display output and light graphical acceleration from a low-power integrated solution. Benchmark results place this part at the 50th percentile among all tracked GPUs, which means it sits in the middle of the performance distribution—neither a high-flying performer nor a bottom-tier unit. For resolution and settings guidance, the data indicates this IGP is suitable for 1080p desktop use and older or less demanding titles at low detail presets, but it should not be expected to handle modern AAA games at high settings or high refresh rates. The 2.400 GPixel/s pixel rate and 4.800 GTexel/s texture rate suggest that pixel fill and texture throughput are modest, which directly limits how much geometry and detail can be pushed at higher resolutions.

Given the 153.6 GFLOPS of FP32 compute, the HD 8400 IGP can manage light productivity tasks, video playback, and basic 2D or casual 3D workloads. It is not a gaming-focused part for competitive esports at high frame rates; instead, its strengths lie in low-power HTPC builds or budget office machines where integrated graphics are sufficient for web browsing, office documents, and media consumption. The system-shared memory architecture means performance will scale with the host system's RAM speed and capacity—a faster dual-channel configuration will yield better results than a single-channel setup, though the FACT PACK does not provide specific numbers for this scaling. Users who intend to play anything released after the part's launch window should plan for reduced resolutions, such as 720p, and low graphical settings.

The 25 W TDP makes it an energy-efficient choice for fanless or passively cooled systems, and the IGP form factor means no separate power connectors or slot width is required. For those who already own a Kabini-based platform, this IGP provides a baseline that is far ahead of older TeraScale 3 IGP predecessors but behind the GCN 3.0 IGP successor. It is not recommended for users seeking high-fidelity gaming, 4K output, or heavy compute workloads; those tasks fall outside what the 128 shading units can deliver.

How It Compares

The FACT PACK lists no nearest rivals for the AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP, and its benchmark array is empty, with an average benchmark score of 0. This means the database contains no direct comparison points from which to derive relative performance deltas. The absence of nearestRivals data indicates that this IGP is not directly benchmarked against any specific competing product in the current dataset.

Without rival entries, the analysis must rely on the percentile field alone. The 50th percentile versus all GPUs places this part exactly at the median of the entire database—half of all tracked GPUs score higher, and half score lower. This is a useful positional anchor even without named rivals, as it suggests the HD 8400 IGP is neither an outlier on the low end nor a standout performer. Compared to its predecessor, the TeraScale 3 IGP, the GCN 2.0 architecture brings modern feature support and efficiency improvements, while the successor GCN 3.0 IGP would presumably offer better performance per clock, though no numeric deltas are available for these generational jumps.

The lack of nearestRivals also means there are no specific competitor names, score deltas, or percentage differences to cite. This is a limitation of the dataset, but the 50th percentile still provides a meaningful reference: it is a mid-pack part. For users comparing it to discrete GPUs, the data would place it below most dedicated graphics cards from its era, but above the weakest integrated solutions. The empty benchmark array further reinforces that this IGP is not a performance-focused product; its role is functional rather than competitive.

Benchmark Performance

The benchmark results for the AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP are not populated in the database—the benchmarks array is empty and the average benchmark score is 0. This absence of numeric scores means there are no absolute performance figures to analyze directly. However, the derived performance metrics from the FACT PACK provide a partial picture of its capabilities: the pixel rate is 2.400 GPixel/s, the texture rate is 4.800 GTexel/s, and FP32 compute is 153.6 GFLOPS.

These figures indicate a very low throughput for a GPU, even by integrated standards. For context, the 128 shading units running at these rates produce a compute density that is roughly an order of magnitude below entry-level discrete GPUs from the same era, though the FACT PACK does not provide rival numbers for direct comparison. The 4 ROPs are a severe bottleneck for fill-rate-bound scenarios, meaning that high-resolution rendering or heavy post-processing effects will cause significant frame rate drops. The 8 TMUs similarly cap texture fetch throughput, which impacts games that rely on detailed texture streaming.

The percentile of 50 versus all GPUs is the only relative benchmark metric available. This suggests that despite the low absolute numbers, the HD 8400 IGP is not the worst performer in the database—it sits squarely in the middle, likely because many older or even less capable IGPs are also tracked. The system-shared memory bandwidth, listed as "System Dependent," means real-world performance will vary widely based on the host platform's memory controller and RAM configuration. A system with fast dual-channel DDR3 would allow the IGP to approach its theoretical limits, while a single-channel or slow RAM setup would further degrade performance.

The FP32 output of 153.6 GFLOPS is the key compute figure, and it places this part well below the threshold for modern gaming or compute acceleration. Pixel rate and texture rate both scale directly from the core clocks and the fixed 4 ROP and 8 TMU counts, so there is no headroom for improvement without a higher clock speed. Since the FACT PACK lists no boost or base clocks, the exact operating frequency cannot be cited, but the derived rates imply a modest clock on the order of a few hundred megahertz—though that number is not provided and cannot be stated.

FAQ

Q: What is the release date of the AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP?

A: The release date is 2013-11-22T17:00:00.000Z.

Q: What is the transistor count and die size for this IGP?

A: It features 1,178 million transistors on a 110 mm² die, with a transistor density of 10.7M per mm².

Q: Which DirectX, OpenGL, and Vulkan versions does it support?

A: It supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170.

Q: How much memory does the HD 8400 IGP have?

A: Memory is system shared, meaning it uses the host system's RAM; the total size, type, and bus width are all listed as "System Shared," and bandwidth is "System Dependent."

Q: What is the thermal design power (TDP) of this part?

A: The TDP is 25 W.

Q: What is the production status and how does it rank?

A: It is end-of-life, and it ranks at the 50th percentile versus all GPUs in the database.

Q: Does it have ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: No, the FACT PACK lists null values for both RT cores and tensor cores.

Ray Tracing and Feature Set

The AMD Radeon HD 8400 IGP does not include any dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores—both fields are null in the specification data. This is consistent with its GCN 2.0 architecture, which predates hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-accelerated tensor operations that appear in much later generations. Consequently, any ray tracing workload would have to be handled through compute shaders on the 128 shading units, which would be impractically slow given the 153.6 GFLOPS FP32 throughput.

The feature set is instead defined by its API support. The part supports DirectX 12 (12_0), which means it can run games and applications that require DirectX 12 feature level 12_0, though performance will be limited by the low shading unit count and system-shared memory. OpenGL 4.6 support enables compatibility with a wide range of legacy and cross-platform applications, and Vulkan 1.2.170 provides modern low-level API access for developers seeking efficient CPU utilization. These APIs do not require dedicated hardware blocks, so the absence of RT and tensor cores does not prevent API usage—it only limits performance in specific workloads.

The memory architecture is entirely system-shared, with no dedicated VRAM. The memory type, bus width, and bandwidth are all either "System Shared" or "System Dependent," meaning the IGP relies on the host CPU's memory controller. This introduces latency and bandwidth contention with the CPU, which can further reduce performance in memory-intensive tasks. The display outputs are also motherboard dependent, so the available video ports (HDMI, DisplayPort, VGA, etc.) vary by the specific Kabini platform implementation.

The pixel rate of 2.400 GPixel/s and texture rate of 4.800 GTexel/s are the concrete rendering throughput figures, and they indicate this IGP is suited for basic 2D acceleration and light 3D. The lack of tensor cores means no AI-based upscaling or denoising features, and the lack of RT cores means no hardware ray tracing. For users who need those features, this part is not viable. Its successor, the GCN 3.0 IGP, would be the generational step forward, but the FACT PACK provides no details on what new features that successor introduced. The predecessor, TeraScale 3 IGP, lacked GCN's compute capabilities, so the HD 8400 IGP does bring improved shader efficiency and modern API support relative to that older line.