GeForce RTX 3070 vs Go 7700
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce Go 7700 with GeForce RTX 3070, including specs and performance data.
RTX 3070 outperforms Go 7700 by a whopping 14934% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1375 | 63 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 25 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 42.88 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 18.66 |
| Architecture | Curie (2003−2013) | Ampere (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | G73B | GA104 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 1 August 2006 (20 years ago) | 1 September 2020 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $499 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
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 cores | 17 | 5888 |
| Core clock speed | 450 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 450 MHz | 1725 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 177 million | 17,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 80 nm | 8 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 220 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 5.400 | 317.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 20.31 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 96 |
| TMUs | 12 | 184 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 184 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 46 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 5.8 MB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 4 MB |
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).
| Laptop size | medium sized | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 1.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 242 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | 1x 12-pin |
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 type | DDR2 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 400 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 12.8 GB/s | 448.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 Connectors | Portable Device Dependent | 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 9.0c (9_3) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 3.0 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | N/A | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
| CUDA | - | 8.5 |
| DLSS | - | + |
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.
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.
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 HD | 0−1 | 149 |
| 1440p | 0−1 | 99 |
| 4K | -0−1 | 63 |
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 3.35 |
| 1440p | no data | 5.04 |
| 4K | no data | 7.92 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 147
+14600%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 130−140
+2540%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 139
+13800%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5 | 200−210
+5050%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 125
+2400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 170−180
+2371%
|
| Valorant | 27−30 | 300−350
+986%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16 | 270−280
+1886%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 126
+12500%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11 | 133
+1230%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5 | 200−210
+5050%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 105
+2000%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 170−180
+2371%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7 | 230
+3733%
|
| Valorant | 27−30 | 300−350
+986%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 102
+10100%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11 | 125
+1150%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5 | 200−210
+5050%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 5−6 | 81
+1520%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8 | 170−180
+2371%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7 | 121
+1917%
|
| Valorant | 27−30 | 237
+746%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3 | 167
+8250%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 0−1 | 350−400 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5 | 170−180
+4275%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2 | 160−170
+16600%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 110−120
+11700%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 117
+680%
|
| Valorant | 5−6 | 300−350
+6040%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2 | 90−95
+9100%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 75−80
+7700%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 270−280 | 270−280 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 198 | 198 |
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 149 | 149 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 330 | 330 |
| Far Cry 5 | 154 | 154 |
| Fortnite | 230−240 | 230−240 |
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 132 | 132 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 257 | 257 |
| Far Cry 5 | 148 | 148 |
| Fortnite | 230−240 | 230−240 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 139 | 139 |
| Metro Exodus | 120 | 120 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 119 | 119 |
| Far Cry 5 | 141 | 141 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 230−240 | 230−240 |
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 98 | 98 |
| Metro Exodus | 75 | 75 |
| Valorant | 350−400 | 350−400 |
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 103 | 103 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 62 | 62 |
| Far Cry 5 | 125 | 125 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 63 | 63 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 140−150 | 140−150 |
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 43 | 43 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35−40 | 35−40 |
| Metro Exodus | 49 | 49 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 90 | 90 |
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 70 | 70 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 65−70 | 65−70 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30 | 30 |
| Dota 2 | 125 | 125 |
| Far Cry 5 | 70 | 70 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 110−120 | 110−120 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 35 | 35 |
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RTX 3070 is 16600% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 3070 performs better in 30 tests (47%)
- there's a draw in 34 tests (53%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.35 | 52.62 |
| Recency | 1 August 2006 | 1 September 2020 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 80 nm | 8 nm |
RTX 3070 has a 14934% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 90% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 3070 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 7700 in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce Go 7700 is a notebook graphics card while GeForce RTX 3070 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
