GeForce 8800 GT vs RTX 2070 Mobile
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile with GeForce 8800 GT, including specs and performance data.
RTX 2070 Mobile outperforms 8800 GT by a whopping 2741% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 150 | 1052 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.03 |
| Power efficiency | 20.72 | 0.67 |
| Architecture | Turing (2018−2022) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | TU106B | G92 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 29 January 2019 (5 years ago) | 29 October 2007 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $349 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 2304 | 112 |
| Core clock speed | 1305 MHz | 600 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1485 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 10,800 million | 754 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 12 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 105 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 213.8 | 33.60 |
| Floating-point processing power | 6.843 TFLOPS | 0.336 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 64 | 16 |
| TMUs | 144 | 56 |
| Tensor Cores | 288 | no data |
| Ray Tracing Cores | 36 | no 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 size | large | no data |
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 229 mm |
| Height | no data | Single Slot |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin |
| SLI options | - | 2-way |
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 | GDDR6 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1750 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 448.0 GB/s | 57.6 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 Connectors | No outputs | Dual Link DVIHDTV |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| G-SYNC support | + | - |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | S/PDIF |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | no data | 128bit |
| VR Ready | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.5 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | 7.5 | + |
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 | 120
+2900%
| 4−5
−2900%
|
| 1440p | 75
+3650%
| 2−3
−3650%
|
| 4K | 48
+4700%
| 1−2
−4700%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 87.25 |
| 1440p | no data | 174.50 |
| 4K | no data | 349.00 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+3400%
|
2−3
−3400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 70−75
+3550%
|
2−3
−3550%
|
| Elden Ring | 110−120
+2875%
|
4−5
−2875%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 95
+3067%
|
3−4
−3067%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+3400%
|
2−3
−3400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 38
+3700%
|
1−2
−3700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 183
+2950%
|
6−7
−2950%
|
| Metro Exodus | 94
+3033%
|
3−4
−3033%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 106
+3433%
|
3−4
−3433%
|
| Valorant | 170
+3300%
|
5−6
−3300%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 135
+3275%
|
4−5
−3275%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+3400%
|
2−3
−3400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 31
+3000%
|
1−2
−3000%
|
| Dota 2 | 118
+2850%
|
4−5
−2850%
|
| Elden Ring | 110−120
+2875%
|
4−5
−2875%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 79
+3850%
|
2−3
−3850%
|
| Fortnite | 150−160
+3060%
|
5−6
−3060%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 149
+2880%
|
5−6
−2880%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 115
+2775%
|
4−5
−2775%
|
| Metro Exodus | 73
+3550%
|
2−3
−3550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 248
+3000%
|
8−9
−3000%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 55
+5400%
|
1−2
−5400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 120−130
+2900%
|
4−5
−2900%
|
| Valorant | 102
+3300%
|
3−4
−3300%
|
| World of Tanks | 270−280
+2989%
|
9−10
−2989%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 83
+4050%
|
2−3
−4050%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 70−75
+3400%
|
2−3
−3400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 26 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 117
+2825%
|
4−5
−2825%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 90−95
+2967%
|
3−4
−2967%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 125
+3025%
|
4−5
−3025%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 104
+3367%
|
3−4
−3367%
|
| Valorant | 154
+2980%
|
5−6
−2980%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 60−65
+3050%
|
2−3
−3050%
|
| Elden Ring | 65−70
+3300%
|
2−3
−3300%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 60−65
+3050%
|
2−3
−3050%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 170−180
+2817%
|
6−7
−2817%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 35
+3400%
|
1−2
−3400%
|
| World of Tanks | 220−230
+3057%
|
7−8
−3057%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 72
+3500%
|
2−3
−3500%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 17 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 110−120
+3600%
|
3−4
−3600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 95−100
+3133%
|
3−4
−3133%
|
| Metro Exodus | 74
+3600%
|
2−3
−3600%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 55−60
+2750%
|
2−3
−2750%
|
| Valorant | 104
+3367%
|
3−4
−3367%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+3400%
|
1−2
−3400%
|
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+3150%
|
2−3
−3150%
|
| Elden Ring | 30−35
+3100%
|
1−2
−3100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 65−70
+3150%
|
2−3
−3150%
|
| Metro Exodus | 26 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 118
+2850%
|
4−5
−2850%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 23 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 65−70
+3150%
|
2−3
−3150%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 38
+3700%
|
1−2
−3700%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+3400%
|
1−2
−3400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 65−70
+3150%
|
2−3
−3150%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 45−50
+4800%
|
1−2
−4800%
|
| Fortnite | 48
+4700%
|
1−2
−4700%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+5500%
|
1−2
−5500%
|
| Valorant | 55
+5400%
|
1−2
−5400%
|
This is how RTX 2070 Mobile and 8800 GT compete in popular games:
- RTX 2070 Mobile is 2900% faster in 1080p
- RTX 2070 Mobile is 3650% faster in 1440p
- RTX 2070 Mobile is 4700% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 34.66 | 1.22 |
| Recency | 29 January 2019 | 29 October 2007 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 115 Watt | 105 Watt |
RTX 2070 Mobile has a 2741% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 441.7% more advanced lithography process.
8800 GT, on the other hand, has 9.5% lower power consumption.
The GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800 GT in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce RTX 2070 Mobile is a notebook card while GeForce 8800 GT is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
