GeForce GTX 770M SLI vs Radeon E8950

Radeon E8950 Radeon R9 M295X Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition Radeon R9 M390X Radeon R9 M395X Radeon R9 M395X Mac Edition Radeon R9 M485X
VS
GTX 770M GTX 770M SLI GTX 775M GTX 775M Mac Edition

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon E8950 and GeForce GTX 770M SLI, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Radeon E8950
2015
8 GB GDDR5, 95 Watt
14.16
+11%

E8950 outperforms GTX 770M SLI by a moderate 11% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
GTX 770M SLI GTX 770M SLI

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking376401
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.225.83
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameAmethystno data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date29 September 2015 (9 years ago)30 May 2013 (11 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 cores20481920
Core clock speed735 MHz811 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors5,000 million2x 2540 Million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate128.0no data
Floating-point processing power4.096 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs128no 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 sizeno datalarge
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)no data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB2x 3 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit2x 192 Bit
Memory clock speed1500 MHz4000 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.0 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

Supported technologies

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

Optimus-+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_0)11
Shader Model6.3no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL2.0no data
Vulkan1.2.131-
CUDA-+

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

Atomic Heart 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Dota 2 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Valorant 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Valorant 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 14.16 12.76
Recency 29 September 2015 30 May 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 150 Watt

Radeon E8950 has a 11% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 57.9% lower power consumption.

The Radeon E8950 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 770M SLI in performance tests.

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.

AMD Radeon E8950
Radeon E8950
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 770M SLI
GeForce GTX 770M SLI
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
GTX 770M SLI GeForce GTX 770M SLI
vs
R9 M395 Radeon R9 M395
Radeon E8950 Radeon E8950
vs
RX 5500M Radeon RX 5500M
R8 M365DX Radeon R8 M365DX
vs
GTX 555 OEM GTX 555 OEM
ATI HD 4770 Radeon HD 4770
vs
GTX 460 X2 GTX 460 X2
HD 7600G Radeon HD 7600G
vs
GT 440 Mac Edition GT 440 Mac Edition
GT 330M GeForce GT 330M
vs
Radeon E6465 Radeon E6465
GTX 770M GeForce GTX 770M
vs
Radeon E8870 Radeon E8870
GTX 760M GeForce GTX 760M
vs
R9 M370X Mac Edition R9 M370X Mac Edition
R9 M395X Mac Edition Radeon R9 M395X Mac Edition
vs
GTX 1060 Max-Q 6 GB GTX 1060 Max-Q 6 GB
R9 M295X Mac Edition Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
vs
GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q GTX 1050 Ti Max-Q
GTX 460M GeForce GTX 460M
vs
R5 M230 Rebrand R5 M230 Rebrand
GT 735M GeForce GT 735M
vs
HD 8530M HD 8530M

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

4.6 14 votes

Rate Radeon E8950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 4 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 770M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon E8950 or GeForce GTX 770M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.