Radeon 780M vs GeForce 8700M GT

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8700M GT and Radeon 780M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

8700M GT
2007
512 MB GDDR3, 29 Watt
0.32

780M outperforms 8700M GT by a whopping 5625% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1308301
Place by popularitynot in top-10049
Power efficiency0.7683.69
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameG84Hawx Point
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 June 2007 (17 years ago)6 December 2023 (1 year 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 cores32768
Core clock speed625 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2700 MHz
Number of transistors289 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)29 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate10.00129.6
Floating-point processing power0.08 TFLOPS8.294 TFLOPS
ROPs832
TMUs1648
Ray Tracing Coresno data12

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 sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-HEPCIe 4.0 x8
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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount512 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.8
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.1
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.1-

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

8700M GT 0.32
Radeon 780M 18.32
+5625%

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.

8700M GT 124
Radeon 780M 7059
+5593%

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.

8700M GT 2026
Radeon 780M 41622
+1954%

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 HD0−135
1440p-0−118
4K-0−112

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1850%
39
+1850%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1267%
40−45
+1267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1750%
35−40
+1750%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1450%
31
+1450%
Hitman 3 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1025%
90−95
+1025%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1400%
60−65
+1400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−211%
85−90
+211%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1267%
40−45
+1267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1750%
35−40
+1750%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1100%
24
+1100%
Hitman 3 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1025%
90−95
+1025%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1250%
54
+1250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−367%
40−45
+367%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
−211%
85−90
+211%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1267%
40−45
+1267%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1750%
35−40
+1750%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−1050%
23
+1050%
Hitman 3 4−5
−775%
35−40
+775%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−563%
53
+563%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 4−5
−1050%
46
+1050%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
−222%
29
+222%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+55.6%
18
−55.6%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 10−11
Hitman 3 6−7
−267%
21−24
+267%
Horizon Zero Dawn 2−3
−1750%
35−40
+1750%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−1400%
30−33
+1400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 9−10

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Metro Exodus 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 32
+0%
32
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
+0%
20
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+0%
15
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 17
+0%
17
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the 8700M GT is 56% faster.
  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the Radeon 780M is 1850% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • 8700M GT is ahead in 1 test (1%)
  • Radeon 780M is ahead in 28 tests (40%)
  • there's a draw in 41 test (59%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.32 18.32
Recency 1 June 2007 6 December 2023
Chip lithography 80 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 29 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 780M has a 5625% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, a 1900% more advanced lithography process, and 93.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 780M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8700M GT in performance tests.


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 8700M GT
GeForce 8700M GT
AMD Radeon 780M
Radeon 780M

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.


4.6 20 votes

Rate GeForce 8700M GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1532 votes

Rate Radeon 780M 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.