ATI Radeon 8500 vs GeForce GTX 670M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 670M with Radeon 8500, including specs and performance data.

GTX 670M
2012
1536 MB GDDR5, 75 Watt
4.52
+22500%

GTX 670M outperforms ATI 8500 by a whopping 22500% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking6571492
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency4.200.06
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameGF114R200
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date22 March 2012 (12 years ago)14 August 2001 (23 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 cores336no data
Core clock speed598 MHz275 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million60 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate33.492.200
Floating-point processing power0.8037 TFLOPSno data
ROPs244
TMUs568

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
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)AGP 4x
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB64 MB
Memory bus width192bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz275 MHz
Memory bandwidth72.0 GB/s8.8 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 outputs1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolutionUp to 2048x1536no data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 API8.1
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.51.4
OpenCL1.1N/A
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. 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.

GTX 670M 4.52
+22500%
ATI 8500 0.02

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.

GTX 670M 1745
+28983%
ATI 8500 6

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:

900p39-0−1
Full HD41-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Battlefield 5 10−12 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 27−30 0−1
Hitman 3 10−11 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33 0−1
Metro Exodus 10−11 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Battlefield 5 10−12 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 27−30 0−1
Hitman 3 10−11 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33 0−1
Metro Exodus 10−11 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50 0−1

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 27−30 0−1
Hitman 3 10−11 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50 0−1

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9 0−1
Hitman 3 9−10 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9 0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1
Hitman 3 1−2 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4 0−1
Metro Exodus 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 3−4 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.52 0.02
Recency 22 March 2012 14 August 2001
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 64 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 23 Watt

GTX 670M has a 22500% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 2300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 275% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 8500, on the other hand, has 226.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 670M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 8500 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 670M is a notebook card while Radeon 8500 is a desktop one.


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 GTX 670M
GeForce GTX 670M
ATI Radeon 8500
Radeon 8500

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.


3.6 91 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 670M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 94 votes

Rate Radeon 8500 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.