Radeon HD 7650M vs GeForce 8800 GT

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8800 GT with Radeon HD 7650M, including specs and performance data.

8800 GT
2007
512 MB GDDR3, 105 Watt
1.19
+7.2%

8800 GT outperforms HD 7650M by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10601085
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Power efficiency0.673.90
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameG92Thames
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date29 October 2007 (17 years ago)7 January 2012 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$349 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

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 cores112480
Core clock speed600 MHz450 MHz
Boost clock speedno data550 MHz
Number of transistors754 million716 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)105 Watt20 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate33.6010.80
Floating-point processing power0.336 TFLOPS0.432 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs5624

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
HeightSingle Slotno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno data
SLI options2-way-

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 typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth57.6 GB/s25.6 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVIHDTVNo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)128bitno data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11.2 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.0
OpenGL2.14.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

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.

8800 GT 1.19
+7.2%
HD 7650M 1.11

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.

8800 GT 468
+7.1%
HD 7650M 437

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:

900p18−20
+0%
18
+0%
Full HD18−21
−5.6%
19
+5.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p19.39no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how 8800 GT and HD 7650M compete in popular games:

  • A tie in 900p
  • HD 7650M is 6% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 44 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.19 1.11
Recency 29 October 2007 7 January 2012
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 105 Watt 20 Watt

8800 GT has a 7.2% higher aggregate performance score.

HD 7650M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 425% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce 8800 GT and Radeon HD 7650M.

Be aware that GeForce 8800 GT is a desktop card while Radeon HD 7650M is a notebook one.

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 8800 GT
GeForce 8800 GT
AMD Radeon HD 7650M
Radeon HD 7650M

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.


3 618 votes

Rate GeForce 8800 GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 81 vote

Rate Radeon HD 7650M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 8800 GT or Radeon HD 7650M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.