Radeon RX 7700S vs GeForce 8700M GT SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 8700M GT SLI and Radeon RX 7700S, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RX 7700S outperforms 8700M GT SLI by a whopping 5006% 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 | 1192 | 131 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 0.95 | 28.25 |
| Architecture | G8x (2007) | RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025) |
| GPU code name | NB8E-SE | Navi 33 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 18 September 2007 (17 years ago) | 4 January 2023 (2 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 cores | 64 | 2048 |
| Core clock speed | 625 MHz | 1500 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2500 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 578 Million | 13,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 80 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 58 Watt | 100 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 320.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 20.48 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 64 |
| TMUs | no data | 128 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 32 |
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 | large |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| 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 | GDDR3 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 2250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 288.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | Portable Device Dependent |
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 | 2.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.3 |
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
−5700%
| 116
+5700%
|
| 1440p | 1−2
−5700%
| 58
+5700%
|
| 4K | 0−1 | 38 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−8700%
|
85−90
+8700%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−8700%
|
85−90
+8700%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−12900%
|
130
+12900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2820%
|
140−150
+2820%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1763%
|
140−150
+1763%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−666%
|
220−230
+666%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
−1214%
|
270−280
+1214%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−8700%
|
85−90
+8700%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−1000%
|
140−150
+1000%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−12200%
|
123
+12200%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2820%
|
140−150
+2820%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−8900%
|
90−95
+8900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1763%
|
140−150
+1763%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−2350%
|
147
+2350%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−666%
|
220−230
+666%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−8700%
|
85−90
+8700%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−1000%
|
140−150
+1000%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−11600%
|
117
+11600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−2820%
|
140−150
+2820%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−1763%
|
140−150
+1763%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1300%
|
84
+1300%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−666%
|
220−230
+666%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 1−2
−9400%
|
95−100
+9400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 3−4
−8633%
|
260−270
+8633%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
−2088%
|
170−180
+2088%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
−5250%
|
100−110
+5250%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
−9800%
|
95−100
+9800%
|
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−353%
|
68
+353%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−5650%
|
230−240
+5650%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−2400%
|
50−55
+2400%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
−2350%
|
45−50
+2350%
|
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 210−220
+0%
|
210−220
+0%
|
| Fortnite | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 110−120
+0%
|
110−120
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 133
+0%
|
133
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 130−140
+0%
|
130−140
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 80−85
+0%
|
80−85
+0%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 160−170
+0%
|
160−170
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 67
+0%
|
67
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| Valorant | 250−260
+0%
|
250−260
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 95−100
+0%
|
95−100
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 81
+0%
|
81
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 43
+0%
|
43
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 60−65
+0%
|
60−65
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+0%
|
40−45
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 20−22
+0%
|
20−22
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 100−110
+0%
|
100−110
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 39
+0%
|
39
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 70−75
+0%
|
70−75
+0%
|
| Sons of the Forest | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
This is how 8700M GT SLI and RX 7700S compete in popular games:
- RX 7700S is 5700% faster in 1080p
- RX 7700S is 5700% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Far Cry 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 7700S is 12900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX 7700S is ahead in 31 tests (48%)
- there's a draw in 34 tests (52%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.71 | 36.25 |
| Recency | 18 September 2007 | 4 January 2023 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 80 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 58 Watt | 100 Watt |
8700M GT SLI has 72.4% lower power consumption.
RX 7700S, on the other hand, has a 5005.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1233.3% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 7700S is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8700M GT SLI in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
