GeForce 8700M GT SLI vs ATI Mobility Radeon HD 3650
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Mobility Radeon HD 3650 and GeForce 8700M GT SLI, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
8700M GT SLI outperforms ATI Mobility HD 3650 by a whopping 119% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in the ranking | 1286 | 1148 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Power efficiency | 0.82 | 0.93 |
Architecture | TeraScale (2005−2013) | G8x (2007) |
GPU code name | M86 | NB8E-SE |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Release date | 7 January 2008 (16 years ago) | 18 September 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 | 120 | 64 |
Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 625 MHz |
Number of transistors | 378 million | 578 Million |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 80 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 58 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 4.000 | no data |
Floating-point processing power | 0.12 TFLOPS | no data |
ROPs | 4 | no data |
TMUs | 8 | 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 | medium sized | large |
Interface | MXM-II | no data |
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 | GDDR3 | GDDR3 |
Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 1 GB |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 700 MHz | 800 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 22.4 GB/s | no data |
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 | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 10.1 (10_1) | 10 |
Shader Model | 4.1 | no data |
OpenGL | 3.3 | no data |
OpenCL | N/A | no data |
Vulkan | N/A | - |
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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Hitman 3 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
−10.7%
|
30−35
+10.7%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Hitman 3 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
−10.7%
|
30−35
+10.7%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
Hitman 3 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−50%
|
12−14
+50%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 4−5
−50%
|
6−7
+50%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
−11.1%
|
10−11
+11.1%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 27−30
−10.7%
|
30−35
+10.7%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
Hitman 3 | 6−7
−16.7%
|
7−8
+16.7%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 2−3
−100%
|
4−5
+100%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
High Preset
Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Epic Preset
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
Battlefield 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Watch Dogs: Legion | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
Far Cry New Dawn | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Horizon Zero Dawn, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the 8700M GT SLI is 100% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- 8700M GT SLI is ahead in 27 tests (79%)
- there's a draw in 7 tests (21%)
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 0.36 | 0.79 |
Recency | 7 January 2008 | 18 September 2007 |
Maximum RAM amount | 512 MB | 1 GB |
Chip lithography | 55 nm | 80 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 58 Watt |
ATI Mobility HD 3650 has an age advantage of 3 months, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 93.3% lower power consumption.
8700M GT SLI, on the other hand, has a 119.4% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.
The GeForce 8700M GT SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobility Radeon HD 3650 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.