Why S-400 is 'better' than Patriot missile defence system

Every time a comparison between American and Russian military equipments is made on social media, a bunch of uneducated trolls crowd the comments section with unmitigated nonsense. To separate the wheat from the chaff, here's an authenticated comparison between the top two missile defence systems of the world:

The S-400 Triumf (Russia) and Patriot MIM-104 (United States) are advanced air and missile defence systems, but they differ in design philosophy, capabilities and operational use.

Manufacturers, objectives and users

S-400 Triumf

Developed by Russia's Almaz-Antey and introduced in 2007 as an evolution of the S-300 series, the S-400 Triumf is designed to counter a wide range of aerial threats, including aircraft, drones, cruise missiles and ballistic missiles. It is exported to China, India, Turkey and others.

Patriot MIM-104

Developed by Raytheon for the US Army and introduced in the 1980s, with multiple upgrades (for example, PAC-2, PAC-3), the Patriot is primarily designed for air and missile defence, focusing on intercepting tactical ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and aircraft. The system is widely used by the US and allied nations, like Ukraine, Poland and Japan.

Technical specifications

Performance and capabilities

S-400 Triumf uses multiple missile types for different ranges and targets, allowing flexible engagement of short-to-long range threats.

The 40N6E missile extends its reach to 400 km, outranging the Patriot.

The 91N6E radar has a more extended detection range (up to 600 km) and can track stealth targets to some extent, though effectiveness against advanced stealth aircraft (like F-35) is debated.

The Russian system can engage up to 80 targets simultaneously with 160 missiles, making it suitable for saturation attacks.

It can intercept short- and medium-range ballistic missiles (up to 3,500 km range, Mach 14).

It had limited real-world combat data until recently, when the S-400 Triumf successfully blocked all Chinese missiles fired by Pakistan at India during the four-day-long India-Pakistan conflict in May this year. Its effectiveness against modern threats (for example, hypersonic missiles) is now no longer speculative.

Integration with other military hardware

Whereas China may struggle with integrating the S-400 Triumf, as a big chunk of its hardware comprises reverse-engineered copies of American systems, India successfully integrated the S-400 with Akash Teer, Barak 8, lower-tech anti-aircraft flak and short-range missiles within its command, control and AI-driven engagement system. Consequently, the S-400 emerged as a significantly more potent weapon in Indian hands than it was for its Russian developers.

India showcased the S-400's offensive capabilities during Operation Sindoor. The innovative tactical approach involved utilising long-range Air-to-Air Defence (AAD) for offensive operations, multi-role air combat aircraft for defensive measures and Beyond Visual Range (BVR) air strikes.

The Patriot system would be ineffective for India, as the Americans would never permit its integration with any domestic layered defence system that includes access to the US source code.

The kill ratios of the Patriot system in Ukraine and Israel are below expectations when compared to the approximately 99% success rate achieved by India's layered offensive defence network.

Given that the Israelis have access to the source code, it suggests that the integration of Indian systems is the unique advantage that even the Israelis lack. While Israelis and Ukrainians are at least as proficient in software systems integration as Indians, they do not possess the extensive scale that India has in this area.

However, multiple-missile type shields require sophisticated coordination and supply chains.

Estimated at $500 million per battalion, the cost limits the system’s widespread deployment, which was why India used its home-made AkashTeer missile defence system more than the S-400 in the May 2025 conflict.

The Patriot MIM-104 (PAC-3) has been successfully used in conflicts (for example, the Gulf War and Ukraine 2022-25) to intercept ballistic missiles, cruise missiles and drones.

The PAC-3 MSE uses direct impact for interception, which is highly effective against tactical ballistic missiles.

It seamlessly integrates with NATO systems, including AEGIS and THAAD, for layered defence.

Its continuous improvements (for example, PAC-3 MSE) enhance the missiles’ range, accuracy and lethality.

However, its range is limited to 180 km (PAC-3 MSE), which is less than the S-400’s maximum range, and this is a drawback when facing a barrage of attacks from the enemy.

Worse, it can engage fewer targets simultaneously compared to the S-400.

A single PAC-3 MSE missile costs ~$4-6 million and a battery is priced at ~$1 billion, making it expensive to operate.

It is slower to deploy than the S-400, which can deny the army using it a rapid response.

Strategic and operational use

The S-400 is designed for area defence, protecting large regions or critical infrastructure (for example, cities and military bases). Its long range and multi-missile configuration make it ideal for deterring air and missile threats over vast areas.

Marketed as a counter to Western air forces, with sales to India, China and Turkey, the S-400 Triumf’s geopolitical significance is understated due to the US-controlled global media and social media. However, the export versions to China and Turkey have downgraded capabilities while that to India has the same capabilities as the Russian original.

Claims on social media

Some social media users claim the S-400 has been deployed in Ukraine, but it failed to counter HIMARS rockets or Ukrainian drones effectively, suggesting limitations in real-world scenarios. Others argue its radar and long-range missiles make it a formidable deterrent against NATO aircraft.

The Patriot is focused on point defence, protecting high-value assets like military bases or cities. Its integration with NATO’s broader missile defence architecture enhances its strategic value.

In Ukraine (2023-25), Patriots have successfully intercepted Russian Kinzhal hypersonic missiles and cruise missiles, though not without losses (for example, damaged systems reported in Kyiv). Its performance in Saudi Arabia against Houthi drones has been mixed, with some failures noted.

While American social media users highlight the Patriot’s success in Ukraine, particularly against Kinzhal missiles, even these nationalists note its high cost and vulnerability to saturation attacks. Some users compare it unfavourably to the S-400’s range and flexibility but praise its reliability.

Key differences

Real-world context and limitations

The S-400 Triumf’s long range and radar capabilities make it a strong deterrent, but its effectiveness against stealth aircraft, hypersonic weapons or saturation attacks is unproven. Reports from Syria and Ukraine suggest mixed performance, with vulnerabilities to electronic warfare and low-altitude threats like drones.

The Patriot’s combat record is stronger, but it struggles against low-cost drones and saturation attacks, as seen in Saudi Arabia and Ukraine. The high cost of PAC-3 missiles limits their use against inexpensive threats like drones.

Why S-400 is better for China, India, while Patriot is better for NATOA

To sum up, the S-400 Triumf, with superior range, radar and multi-target engagement, is better suited for area defence and strategic deterrence. However, its Chinese and Turkish versions are not as good as the original Russian and Indian variety.

The Patriot excels in point defence and integration with NATO systems, and it has a longer track record in combat. Its shorter range and higher cost are drawbacks, but its hit-to-kill precision is unmatched for ballistic missile defence.

The S-400 is ideal for nations seeking standalone, long-range defence (for example, India and China), which largely rely on Russian hardware, with which this system is compatible. The Patriot is better for NATO allies or scenarios requiring integration with other American offence and defence systems and proven reliability.

Sources of information

• Military Studies — Google Scholar Metrics
• Journal of Defence Resources Management
• Security and Defence Quarterly
• US and Russian government websites
• News reports from neutral third parties
• Jane's Defence Weekly
• Grok AI chatbot (for the two charts)