GeForce RTX 4070 vs 8700M GT SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 8700M GT SLI with GeForce RTX 4070, including specs and performance data.
RTX 4070 outperforms 8700M GT SLI by a whopping 8757% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1158 | 23 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 36 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 60.55 |
| Power efficiency | 0.94 | 24.03 |
| Architecture | G8x (2007) | Ada Lovelace (2022−2024) |
| GPU code name | NB8E-SE | AD104 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 18 September 2007 (17 years ago) | 12 April 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $599 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 64 | 5888 |
| Core clock speed | 625 MHz | 1920 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2475 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 578 Million | 35,800 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 80 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 58 Watt | 200 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 455.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 29.15 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 64 |
| TMUs | no data | 184 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 184 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 46 |
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 | large | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 240 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 16-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 | GDDR3 | GDDR6X |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 1313 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 504.2 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
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 Connectors | no data | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.7 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.3 |
| CUDA | - | 8.9 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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.
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 | 2−3
−10650%
| 215
+10650%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−12000%
| 121
+12000%
|
| 4K | 0−1 | 73 |
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 2.79 |
| 1440p | no data | 4.95 |
| 4K | no data | 8.21 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−15900%
|
320
+15900%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−2271%
|
160−170
+2271%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−10700%
|
216
+10700%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−12400%
|
250
+12400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−2271%
|
160−170
+2271%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−8600%
|
174
+8600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−5020%
|
250−260
+5020%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2113%
|
170−180
+2113%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−1117%
|
350−400
+1117%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−7300%
|
148
+7300%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−2271%
|
160−170
+2271%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 20−22
−1290%
|
270−280
+1290%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−7050%
|
143
+7050%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−8746%
|
1150−1200
+8746%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−5020%
|
250−260
+5020%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 168 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2113%
|
170−180
+2113%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−6920%
|
351
+6920%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−1117%
|
350−400
+1117%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
−2271%
|
160−170
+2271%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−6300%
|
128
+6300%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−8746%
|
1150−1200
+8746%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−5020%
|
250−260
+5020%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2113%
|
170−180
+2113%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−3300%
|
170
+3300%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
−1117%
|
350−400
+1117%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 60−65 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4
−16467%
|
450−500
+16467%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−4275%
|
170−180
+4275%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 81 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−10900%
|
220−230
+10900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−7550%
|
150−160
+7550%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−15000%
|
150−160
+15000%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
−5900%
|
60−65
+5900%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−873%
|
146
+873%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−8175%
|
300−350
+8175%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 36 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−9200%
|
93
+9200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−4700%
|
95−100
+4700%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−3850%
|
75−80
+3850%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 210
+0%
|
210
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 204
+0%
|
204
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 174
+0%
|
174
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 189
+0%
|
189
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 300−350
+0%
|
300−350
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 137
+0%
|
137
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 104
+0%
|
104
+0%
|
| Valorant | 400−450
+0%
|
400−450
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 171
+0%
|
171
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 65
+0%
|
65
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 115
+0%
|
115
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 45−50
+0%
|
45−50
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 170−180
+0%
|
170−180
+0%
|
This is how 8700M GT SLI and RTX 4070 compete in popular games:
- RTX 4070 is 10650% faster in 1080p
- RTX 4070 is 12000% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 4070 is 16467% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 4070 is ahead in 34 tests (60%)
- there's a draw in 23 tests (40%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.79 | 69.97 |
| Recency | 18 September 2007 | 12 April 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 12 GB |
| Chip lithography | 80 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 58 Watt | 200 Watt |
8700M GT SLI has 244.8% lower power consumption.
RTX 4070, on the other hand, has a 8757% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1500% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 4070 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8700M GT SLI in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 8700M GT SLI is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 4070 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.
