UHD Graphics 617 vs GeForce 9800M GTX

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9800M GTX and UHD Graphics 617, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

9800M GTX
2008, $329
1 GB GDDR3, 75 Watt
1.08

Graphics 617 outperforms 9800M by an impressive 91% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1123919
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Power efficiency1.1110.54
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Generation 9.5 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameG92Amber Lake GT2
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 July 2008 (17 years ago)7 November 2018 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$328.50 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 cores112192
CUDA cores per GPU112no data
Core clock speed500 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1050 MHz
Number of transistors754 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate28.0025.20
Floating-point processing power0.28 TFLOPS0.4032 TFLOPS
Gigaflops420no data
ROPs163
TMUs5624
L2 Cache64 KBno data

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
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16Ring Bus
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed800 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/sno data
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 ConnectorsNo outputsPortable Device Dependent

Supported technologies

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

Quick Syncno data+

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
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.

9800M GTX 1.08
UHD Graphics 617 2.06
+90.7%

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.

9800M GTX 454
Samples: 47
UHD Graphics 617 862
+89.9%

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 HD7−8
−114%
15
+114%

Cost per frame, $

1080p46.93no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 0−1 6−7
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Fortnite 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
Valorant 30−35
−25%
40−45
+25%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 0−1 6−7
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 24−27
−61.5%
40−45
+61.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
15
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Fortnite 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
Forza Horizon 5 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Valorant 30−35
−25%
40−45
+25%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 0−1 6−7
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%
Dota 2 14−16
+7.1%
14
−7.1%
Escape from Tarkov 2−3
−250%
7−8
+250%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−57.1%
10−12
+57.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−22.2%
10−12
+22.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Valorant 30−35
−25%
40−45
+25%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 7−8
−114%
14−16
+114%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
−81.8%
20−22
+81.8%
Valorant 2−3
−700%
16−18
+700%

1440p
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 1−2
Escape from Tarkov 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Valorant 6−7
−66.7%
10−11
+66.7%

4K
Ultra

Dota 2 0−1 5−6
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−50%
3−4
+50%

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

4K
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Escape from Tarkov 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how 9800M GTX and UHD Graphics 617 compete in popular games:

  • UHD Graphics 617 is 114% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Dota 2, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the 9800M GTX is 7% faster.
  • in Valorant, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics 617 is 700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • 9800M GTX performs better in 1 test (2%)
  • UHD Graphics 617 performs better in 41 tests (82%)
  • there's a draw in 8 tests (16%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.08 2.06
Recency 15 July 2008 7 November 2018
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 15 Watt

UHD Graphics 617 has a 90.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 617 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9800M GTX in performance tests.

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 9800M GTX
GeForce 9800M GTX
Intel UHD Graphics 617
UHD Graphics 617

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.


2.3 3 votes

Rate GeForce 9800M GTX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 79 votes

Rate UHD Graphics 617 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 9800M GTX or UHD Graphics 617, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.