GeForce 8700M GT SLI vs Radeon R4 (Kaveri)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R4 (Kaveri) and GeForce 8700M GT SLI, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
R4 (Kaveri) outperforms 8700M GT SLI by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1137 | 1151 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 0.94 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.1 (2014) | G8x (2007) |
| GPU code name | Kaveri | NB8E-SE |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 4 June 2014 (10 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 | 192 | 64 |
| Core clock speed | 533 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2410 Million | 578 Million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 80 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 58 Watt |
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 | large |
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 | no data | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 64/128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 800 MHz |
| Shared memory | + | - |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 10 |
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.
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 | 8
+14.3%
| 7−8
−14.3%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| World of Tanks | 13
−53.8%
|
20−22
+53.8%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
1440p
High Preset
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| World of Tanks | 4−5
+33.3%
|
3−4
−33.3%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+0%
|
30−35
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Dota 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
This is how R4 (Kaveri) and 8700M GT SLI compete in popular games:
- R4 (Kaveri) is 14% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Cyberpunk 2077, with 1080p resolution and the Low Preset, the R4 (Kaveri) is 33% faster.
- in World of Tanks, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the 8700M GT SLI is 54% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- R4 (Kaveri) is ahead in 10 tests (29%)
- 8700M GT SLI is ahead in 1 test (3%)
- there's a draw in 24 tests (69%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.86 | 0.79 |
| Recency | 4 June 2014 | 18 September 2007 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 80 nm |
R4 (Kaveri) has a 8.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R4 (Kaveri) and GeForce 8700M GT SLI.
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.
