GeForce 9650M GS vs Radeon HD 8570D
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 8570D with GeForce 9650M GS, including specs and performance data.
HD 8570D outperforms 9650M GS by a considerable 45% 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 | 1188 | 1261 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.12 | 1.73 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 3 (2010−2013) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | Devastator Lite | G84 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 10 July 2013 (13 years ago) | 13 March 2008 (18 years ago) |
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 | 256 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | 800 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 868 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,303 million | 289 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 32 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 29 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 13.89 | 10.00 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.4444 TFLOPS | 0.08 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 16 | 16 |
| L2 Cache | no data | 32 KB |
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 | no data | large |
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Width | IGP | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | System Shared | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
| 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 Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | - | 1.1 |
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.
3DMark Vantage Performance
3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.
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 | 13
+62.5%
| 8−9
−62.5%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Palworld | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
+7.1%
|
27−30
−7.1%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
+26.3%
|
18−20
−26.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 6
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Palworld | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
+7.1%
|
27−30
−7.1%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
+7.1%
|
27−30
−7.1%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Palworld | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 6−7
+100%
|
3−4
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Valorant | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Palworld | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
This is how HD 8570D and 9650M GS compete in popular games:
- HD 8570D is 63% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the HD 8570D is 100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- HD 8570D performs better in 28 tests (85%)
- there's a draw in 5 tests (15%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.94 | 0.65 |
| Recency | 10 July 2013 | 13 March 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 29 Watt |
HD 8570D has a 45% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, and a 150% more advanced lithography process.
9650M GS, on the other hand, has 124% lower power consumption.
The Radeon HD 8570D is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9650M GS in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 8570D is a desktop graphics card while GeForce 9650M GS 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.
