Radeon R4 (Kaveri) vs GeForce 8800M GTS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8800M GTS and Radeon R4 (Kaveri), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

8800M GTS
2007
512 MB GDDR3, 50 Watt
0.99
+16.5%

8800M GTS outperforms R4 (Kaveri) by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking10701095
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.07no data
ArchitectureG9x (2007−2010)GCN 1.1 (2014)
GPU code nameNB8E-GTKaveri
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date19 November 2007 (16 years ago)4 June 2014 (10 years ago)
Current price$110 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores64192
CUDA cores64no data
Core clock speed500 MHz533 MHz
Number of transistors754 million2410 Million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Wattno data
Texture fill rate16.00no data
Floating-point performance160 gflopsno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce 8800M GTS and Radeon R4 (Kaveri) compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizelargeno data
InterfaceMXM-HEno data

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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount512 MBno data
Memory bus width256 Bit64/128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth51.2 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 outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (FL 12_0)
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/Ano data
CUDA1.1no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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.

8800M GTS 0.99
+16.5%
R4 (Kaveri) 0.85

GeForce 8800M GTS outperforms Radeon R4 (Kaveri) by 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

8800M GTS 2552
+30.3%
R4 (Kaveri) 1958

GeForce 8800M GTS outperforms Radeon R4 (Kaveri) by 30% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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 HD12−14
+9.1%
11
−9.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Hitman 3 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
+8.3%
12−14
−8.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+10%
10−11
−10%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Metro Exodus 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

This is how 8800M GTS and R4 (Kaveri) compete in popular games:

  • 8800M GTS is 9% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Hitman 3, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the 8800M GTS is 50% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • 8800M GTS is ahead in 12 tests (33%)
  • there's a draw in 24 tests (67%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.99 0.85
Recency 19 November 2007 4 June 2014
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm

The GeForce 8800M GTS is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R4 (Kaveri) 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 8800M GTS
GeForce 8800M GTS
AMD Radeon R4 (Kaveri)
Radeon R4 (Kaveri)

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.


2.2 17 votes

Rate GeForce 8800M GTS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 11 votes

Rate Radeon R4 (Kaveri) 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.