GeForce 8700M GT vs GTX 960

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking338not rated
Place by popularity59not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.85no data
Power efficiency9.11no data
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGM206G84
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date22 January 2015 (9 years ago)1 June 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores102432
Core clock speed1127 MHz625 MHz
Boost clock speed1178 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,940 million289 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt29 Watt
Texture fill rate75.3910.00
Floating-point processing power2.413 TFLOPS0.08 TFLOPS
ROPs328
TMUs6416

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-HE
Length241 mmno data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Recommended system power (PSU)400 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s800 MHz
Memory bandwidth112 GB/s25.6 GB/s
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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2No outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support+-
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.43.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan+N/A
CUDA+1.1

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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 960 6078
+4802%
8700M GT 124

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.

GTX 960 30751
+1418%
8700M GT 2026

Pros & cons summary


Recency 22 January 2015 1 June 2007
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 80 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 29 Watt

GTX 960 has an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

8700M GT, on the other hand, has 313.8% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 960 and GeForce 8700M GT. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 960 is a desktop card while GeForce 8700M GT is a notebook 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 960
GeForce GTX 960
NVIDIA GeForce 8700M GT
GeForce 8700M GT

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.


4 3750 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 960 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 20 votes

Rate GeForce 8700M GT 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.