Radeon Pro W6800X Duo vs GeForce 830M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 830M with Radeon Pro W6800X Duo, including specs and performance data.

GeForce 830M
2014
2 GB DDR3, 33 Watt
2.39

Pro W6800X Duo outperforms 830M by a whopping 1375% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking895160
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.83
Power efficiency5.586.79
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025)
GPU code nameGM108Navi 21
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date12 March 2014 (12 years ago)3 August 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$4,999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores2563840 ×2
Core clock speed1082 MHz1800 MHz
Boost clock speed1150 MHz1967 MHz
Number of transistorsno data26,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)33 Watt400 Watt
Texture fill rate18.40472.1 ×2
Floating-point processing power0.5888 TFLOPS15.11 TFLOPS ×2
ROPs896 ×2
TMUs16240 ×2
Ray Tracing Coresno data60 ×2
L0 Cacheno data960 KB
L1 Cache128 KB768 KB
L2 Cache1024 KB4 MB
L3 Cacheno data128 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).

Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8Apple MPX
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno dataQuad-slot
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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB32 GB ×2
Memory bus width64 Bit256 Bit ×2
Memory clock speed900 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s512.0 GB/s ×2
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 ConnectorsNo outputs1x HDMI 2.1, 4x Thunderbolt
HDMI-+

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 and SDK support

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
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.

GeForce 830M 2.39
Pro W6800X Duo 35.25
+1375%

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.

GeForce 830M 1001
Samples: 394
Pro W6800X Duo 14742
+1373%
Samples: 2

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 HD16
−1338%
230−240
+1338%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data21.73

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−1317%
85−90
+1317%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−1300%
70−75
+1300%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 7−8
−1329%
100−105
+1329%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−1317%
85−90
+1317%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−1300%
70−75
+1300%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1317%
85−90
+1317%
Fortnite 12−14
−1317%
170−180
+1317%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−1317%
170−180
+1317%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
−1300%
70−75
+1300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−1317%
170−180
+1317%
Valorant 40−45
−1329%
600−650
+1329%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 7−8
−1329%
100−105
+1329%
Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−1317%
85−90
+1317%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
−1283%
650−700
+1283%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−1300%
70−75
+1300%
Dota 2 24−27
−1300%
350−400
+1300%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1317%
85−90
+1317%
Fortnite 12−14
−1317%
170−180
+1317%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−1317%
170−180
+1317%
Forza Horizon 5 5−6
−1300%
70−75
+1300%
Grand Theft Auto V 11
−1355%
160−170
+1355%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−1275%
55−60
+1275%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−1317%
170−180
+1317%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7
−1329%
100−105
+1329%
Valorant 40−45
−1329%
600−650
+1329%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 7−8
−1329%
100−105
+1329%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
−1300%
70−75
+1300%
Dota 2 24−27
−1300%
350−400
+1300%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1317%
85−90
+1317%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
−1317%
170−180
+1317%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−1317%
170−180
+1317%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6
−1317%
85−90
+1317%
Valorant 40−45
−1329%
600−650
+1329%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 12−14
−1317%
170−180
+1317%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
−1317%
85−90
+1317%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 18−20
−1344%
260−270
+1344%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
−1204%
300−310
+1204%
Valorant 20−22
−1350%
290−300
+1350%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−1275%
55−60
+1275%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−1317%
85−90
+1317%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
−1275%
55−60
+1275%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 4−5
−1275%
55−60
+1275%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−1367%
220−230
+1367%
Valorant 12−14
−1317%
170−180
+1317%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 6−7
−1317%
85−90
+1317%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−1300%
14−16
+1300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 3−4
−1233%
40−45
+1233%

This is how GeForce 830M and Pro W6800X Duo compete in popular games:

  • Pro W6800X Duo is 1338% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.39 35.25
Recency 12 March 2014 3 August 2021
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 32 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 33 Watt 400 Watt

GeForce 830M has 1112% lower power consumption.

Pro W6800X Duo, on the other hand, has a 1375% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 300% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Pro W6800X Duo is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 830M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 830M is a notebook graphics card while Radeon Pro W6800X Duo is a workstation 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.


3.6 120 votes

Rate GeForce 830M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 41 votes

Rate Radeon Pro W6800X Duo on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 830M or Radeon Pro W6800X Duo, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.