GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB vs 8800M GTX SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce 8800M GTX SLI with GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB, including specs and performance data.
1060 5 GB outperforms 8800M SLI by a whopping 1060% 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 | 944 | 288 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.12 | 14.06 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | NB8E-GTX | GP106 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 19 November 2007 (18 years ago) | 26 December 2017 (7 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 | 192 | 1280 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 1506 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1709 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 4,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 120 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 136.7 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 4.375 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 40 |
| TMUs | no data | 80 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 480 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 1280 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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 250 mm |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 5 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 160 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 800 MHz | 2002 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 160.2 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 Connectors | no data | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | no data | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | - | 6.1 |
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
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 6−7
−983%
|
65−70
+983%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−1025%
|
90−95
+1025%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1000%
|
110−120
+1000%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−991%
|
120−130
+991%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−953%
|
400−450
+953%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40
−1054%
|
450−500
+1054%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−1043%
|
240−250
+1043%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 6−7
−983%
|
65−70
+983%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Fortnite | 8−9
−1025%
|
90−95
+1025%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1000%
|
110−120
+1000%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−991%
|
120−130
+991%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1025%
|
90−95
+1025%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−953%
|
400−450
+953%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Dota 2 | 21−24
−1043%
|
240−250
+1043%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 6−7
−983%
|
65−70
+983%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
−1000%
|
110−120
+1000%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
−991%
|
120−130
+991%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
−1025%
|
90−95
+1025%
|
| Valorant | 35−40
−953%
|
400−450
+953%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9
−1025%
|
90−95
+1025%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 14−16
−1043%
|
160−170
+1043%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
−1058%
|
220−230
+1058%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
−1054%
|
150−160
+1054%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−900%
|
10−11
+900%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
−1000%
|
55−60
+1000%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−1043%
|
160−170
+1043%
|
| Valorant | 9−10
−1011%
|
100−105
+1011%
|
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 4−5
−1025%
|
45−50
+1025%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4
−900%
|
30−33
+900%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.87 | 21.69 |
| Recency | 19 November 2007 | 26 December 2017 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 5 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 16 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 120 Watt |
GTX 1060 5 GB has a 1059.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 900% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 306.3% more advanced lithography process, and 8.3% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800M GTX SLI in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce 8800M GTX SLI is a notebook graphics card while GeForce GTX 1060 5 GB is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
