GeForce 8700M GT SLI vs Radeon R6 (Mullins)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon R6 (Mullins) and GeForce 8700M GT SLI, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
8700M GT SLI outperforms R6 (Mullins) by a significant 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1205 | 1159 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 0.93 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.1 (2014) | G8x (2007) |
| GPU code name | Mullins | NB8E-SE |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 29 April 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 | 128 | 64 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 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 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 800 MHz |
| Shared memory | + | - |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (FL 12_0) | 10 |
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 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−3.4%
|
30−33
+3.4%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 18−20
−11.1%
|
20−22
+11.1%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−8.3%
|
12−14
+8.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Metro Exodus | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−3.4%
|
30−33
+3.4%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 12−14
−8.3%
|
12−14
+8.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
−3.4%
|
30−33
+3.4%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
+0%
|
4−5
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Forza Horizon 4, 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 17 tests (49%)
- there's a draw in 18 tests (51%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.64 | 0.79 |
| Recency | 29 April 2014 | 18 September 2007 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 80 nm |
R6 (Mullins) has an age advantage of 6 years, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.
8700M GT SLI, on the other hand, has a 23.4% higher aggregate performance score.
The GeForce 8700M GT SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R6 (Mullins) 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.
