Radeon HD 6430M vs GeForce 8800 Ultra

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8800 Ultra with Radeon HD 6430M, including specs and performance data.

8800 Ultra
2007, $829
512 MB GDDR3, 171 Watt
1.54
+235%

8800 Ultra outperforms HD 6430M by a whopping 235% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10141314
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency0.69no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameG80Seymour
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date2 May 2007 (18 years ago)4 January 2011 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$829 no data

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 cores612160
Core clock speed612 MHz480 MHz
Number of transistors681 million370 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)171 Wattno data
Texture fill rate39.173.840
Floating-point processing power0.3871 TFLOPS0.1536 TFLOPS
ROPs244
TMUs328
L1 Cacheno data16 KB
L2 Cache96 KB128 KB

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length270 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data
SLI options+-

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 width384 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1080 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth103.7 GB/s12.8 GB/s
Shared memory--

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API and SDK support

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
OpenGL3.34.4
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/AN/A
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.

8800 Ultra 1.54
+235%
HD 6430M 0.46

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 Ultra 642
+234%
Samples: 41
HD 6430M 192
Samples: 9

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Valorant 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 27 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.54 0.46
Recency 2 May 2007 4 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 1 GB
Chip lithography 90 nm 40 nm

8800 Ultra has a 235% higher aggregate performance score.

HD 6430M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 125% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce 8800 Ultra is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6430M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8800 Ultra is a desktop graphics card while Radeon HD 6430M is a notebook 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.


4.2 35 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 3 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6430M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 8800 Ultra or Radeon HD 6430M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.