GeForce GT 425M vs Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics

Place in the ranking	890	1017
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	no data	4.06
Architecture	no data	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	no data	GF108
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 August 2013 (11 years ago)	3 September 2010 (14 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	768	96
Core clock speed	720 / 650 MHz	560 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	585 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	8.960
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.215 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	4
TMUs	no data	16

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	medium sized
Interface	no data	PCIe 2.0 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	DDR3	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	no data	1 GB
Memory bus width	64 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1800 - 2000 MHz	800 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	25.6 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 data

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11	12 API
Shader Model	no data	5.1
OpenGL	no data	4.5
OpenCL	no data	1.1
Vulkan	-	N/A
CUDA	-	+

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.

HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics 1.99
+47.4%

GT 425M 1.35

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics 2004
+166%

GT 425M 753

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.

HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics 5644
+67%

GT 425M 3381

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:

900p	16−18 +45.5%	11 −45.5%
Full HD	12 −41.7%	17 +41.7%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +28.6%	14−16 −28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +6.1%	30−35 −6.1%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +28.6%	14−16 −28.6%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 +100%	2−3 −100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +6.1%	30−35 −6.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Forza Horizon 4	8−9 +167%	3−4 −167%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20 +28.6%	14−16 −28.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11 +25%	8−9 −25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +9.1%	10−12 −9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35−40 +6.1%	30−35 −6.1%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5
+100%

2−3

−100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−12 +83.3%	6−7 −83.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

5−6
+25%

4−5

−25%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

+0%

1−2

+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

This is how HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics and GT 425M compete in popular games:

HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics is 45% faster in 900p
GT 425M is 42% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Battlefield 5, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics is 200% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics is ahead in 39 tests (80%)
there's a draw in 10 tests (20%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.99	1.35
Recency	1 August 2013	3 September 2010
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm

HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics has a 47.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 8650G + HD 8570M Dual Graphics is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 425M in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.