GeForce Go 7700 vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS and GeForce Go 7700, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS outperforms Go 7700 by a whopping 3051% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 432 | 1300 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 27.44 | no data |
| Architecture | no data | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | no data | G73 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 26 October 2023 (1 year ago) | 1 August 2006 (18 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 | 1536 | 17 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 450 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1250 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 177 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | no data |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 5.400 |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 12 |
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 | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
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 | LPDDR5x | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8448 MHz | 500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 16 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 data | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | no data | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | no data | N/A |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
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 | 32
+3100%
| 1−2
−3100%
|
| 1440p | 14 | -0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+6100%
|
1−2
−6100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 20−22
+400%
|
4−5
−400%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+4900%
|
1−2
−4900%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+6100%
|
1−2
−6100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 65−70
+3250%
|
2−3
−3250%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+1500%
|
3−4
−1500%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+3400%
|
1−2
−3400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 20−22
+400%
|
4−5
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+486%
|
7−8
−486%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+292%
|
24−27
−292%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+4900%
|
1−2
−4900%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+6100%
|
1−2
−6100%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170
+1071%
|
14−16
−1071%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 28 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 65−70
+3250%
|
2−3
−3250%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+1500%
|
3−4
−1500%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 35−40
+3400%
|
1−2
−3400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35
+3400%
|
1−2
−3400%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 20−22
+400%
|
4−5
−400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+486%
|
7−8
−486%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40
+700%
|
5−6
−700%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+292%
|
24−27
−292%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+4900%
|
1−2
−4900%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 26 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+1500%
|
3−4
−1500%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 20−22
+400%
|
4−5
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+486%
|
7−8
−486%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 19
+280%
|
5−6
−280%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+292%
|
24−27
−292%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 65−70
+3250%
|
2−3
−3250%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 85−90 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 15 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 65−70
+1625%
|
4−5
−1625%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+4000%
|
3−4
−4000%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+2600%
|
1−2
−2600%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 24−27 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+46.7%
|
14−16
−46.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 60−65
+2900%
|
2−3
−2900%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| Hogwarts Legacy | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Dota 2 | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
This is how Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS and Go 7700 compete in popular games:
- Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 3100% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 2900% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is ahead in 26 tests (93%)
- there's a draw in 2 tests (7%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 11.03 | 0.35 |
| Recency | 26 October 2023 | 1 August 2006 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 90 nm |
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS has a 3051.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, and a 2150% more advanced lithography process.
The Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 7700 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
