ATI Radeon X1650 GTO vs GeForce GTX 870M

Place in the ranking	488	1398
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	6.20	no data
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	R500 (2005−2007)
GPU code name	GK104	RV530
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	12 March 2014 (10 years ago)	2 December 2007 (17 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	1344	no data
Core clock speed	941 MHz	587 MHz
Boost clock speed	967 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	3,540 million	157 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	108.3	2.348
Floating-point processing power	2.599 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	24	4
TMUs	112	4

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
Bus support	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 1.0 x16
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	None
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 type	GDDR5	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	256 MB
Standard memory configuration	GDDR5	no data
Memory bus width	192 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	Up to 2500 MHz	392 MHz
Memory bandwidth	120.0 GB/s	12.54 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI, 1x VGA
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
HDMI	+	+
HDCP content protection	+	-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	+	-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	+	-

Supported technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	5.1	3.0
OpenGL	4.5	2.0
OpenCL	1.1	N/A
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/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 870M 9.01
+4642%

ATI X1650 GTO 0.19

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 870M 3462
+4578%

ATI X1650 GTO 74

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 HD	45	0−1
4K	20	-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20	0−1
Elden Ring	24−27	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	35−40	0−1
Metro Exodus	24−27	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27	0−1
Valorant	30−35	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20	0−1
Dota 2	24	0−1
Elden Ring	24−27	0−1
Far Cry 5	35−40	0−1
Fortnite	50−55 +5200%	1−2 −5200%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	36	0−1
Metro Exodus	24−27	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +7000%	1−2 −7000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	31	0−1
Valorant	30−35	0−1
World of Tanks	130−140 +6550%	2−3 −6550%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20	0−1
Dota 2	30−35	0−1
Far Cry 5	35−40	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	35−40	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +7000%	1−2 −7000%
Valorant	30−35	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−12	0−1
Elden Ring	12−14	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	10−12	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8	0−1
World of Tanks	65−70 +6400%	1−2 −6400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8	0−1
Far Cry 5	18−20	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	18−20	0−1
Metro Exodus	16−18	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12	0−1
Valorant	21−24	0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Dota 2	18−20	0−1
Elden Ring	5−6	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20	0−1
Metro Exodus	4−5	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	18−20	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−12	0−1
Fortnite	9−10	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−12	0−1
Valorant	9−10	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	9.01	0.19
Recency	12 March 2014	2 December 2007
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	256 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	90 nm

GTX 870M has a 4642.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 870M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon X1650 GTO in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 870M is a notebook card while Radeon X1650 GTO is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.