Radeon Picasso vs GeForce 800M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1058not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.47no data
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGF117Picasso
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date17 March 2014 (10 years ago)no data (2024 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores48640
Core clock speed738 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1301 MHz
Number of transistors585 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt10 Watt
Texture fill rate5.90452.04
Floating-point processing power0.1417 TFLOPS1.665 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs840

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).

Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Widthno dataIGP
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width64 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/sno data

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs

Supported technologies

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

GPU Boost2.0no data
Optimus+-
GameWorks+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA2.1-

Pros & cons summary


Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 10 Watt

Picasso has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 800M and Radeon Picasso. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 800M is a notebook card while Radeon Picasso is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 800M
GeForce 800M
AMD Radeon Picasso
Radeon Picasso

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.1 70 votes

Rate GeForce 800M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 3 votes

Rate Radeon Picasso on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.