Iris Plus Graphics 655 vs GeForce 8800 GTX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8800 GTX with Iris Plus Graphics 655, including specs and performance data.

8800 GTX
2006, $599
768 MB GDDR3, 155 Watt
1.33

Plus Graphics 655 outperforms 8800 GTX by a whopping 211% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking1071741
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency0.6621.35
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameG80Coffee Lake GT3e
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date8 November 2006 (19 years ago)3 April 2018 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores575384
Core clock speed576 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1050 MHz
Number of transistors681 million189 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm14 nm+++
Power consumption (TDP)155 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate36.8650.40
Floating-point processing power0.3456 TFLOPS0.8064 TFLOPS
ROPs246
TMUs3248
L2 Cache96 KBno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16Ring Bus
Length270 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount768 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width384 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth86.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.1 (1.0)3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

8800 GTX 1.33
Iris Plus Graphics 655 4.14
+211%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

8800 GTX 555
Samples: 575
Iris Plus Graphics 655 1723
+210%
Samples: 1619

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD6−7
−250%
21
+250%
1440p3−4
−233%
10
+233%
4K5−6
−220%
16
+220%

Cost per frame, $

1080p99.83no data
1440p199.67no data
4K119.80no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Palworld 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 11
+0%
11
+0%
Fortnite 22
+0%
22
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Palworld 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 50
+0%
50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 32
+0%
32
+0%
Far Cry 5 10
+0%
10
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
+0%
10
+0%
Metro Exodus 6
+0%
6
+0%
Palworld 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Dota 2 28
+0%
28
+0%
Far Cry 5 9
+0%
9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
+0%
6
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Palworld 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4
+0%
4
+0%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Palworld 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 12
+0%
12
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 12
+0%
12
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

This is how 8800 GTX and Iris Plus Graphics 655 compete in popular games:

  • Iris Plus Graphics 655 is 250% faster in 1080p
  • Iris Plus Graphics 655 is 233% faster in 1440p
  • Iris Plus Graphics 655 is 220% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.33 4.14
Recency 8 November 2006 3 April 2018
Chip lithography 90 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 155 Watt 15 Watt

Iris Plus Graphics 655 has a 211% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 543% more advanced lithography process, and 933% lower power consumption.

The Iris Plus Graphics 655 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800 GTX in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8800 GTX is a desktop graphics card while Iris Plus Graphics 655 is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.2 153 votes

Rate GeForce 8800 GTX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 373 votes

Rate Iris Plus Graphics 655 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 8800 GTX or Iris Plus Graphics 655, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.