GeForce 8800 GT vs Radeon R7 265

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 265 and GeForce 8800 GT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 265
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
10.37
+730%

R7 265 outperforms 8800 GT by a whopping 730% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking4041001
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.720.02
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2012−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code namePitcairnG92
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 February 2014 (10 years ago)29 October 2007 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $349
Current price$242 (1.6x MSRP)$166 (0.5x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 265 has 8500% better value for money than 8800 GT.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1024112
CUDA coresno data112
Core clock speedno data600 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million754 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt105 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate59.2033.6 billion/sec
Floating-point performance1,894 gflops336.0 gflops

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).

Bus supportPCIe 3.0PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length210 mm9" (22.9 cm)
Heightno dataSingle Slot
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pin6-pin & 8-pin
SLI optionsno data2-way

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s57.6 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortDual Link DVIHDTV
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity1no data
HDMI+no data
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
DisplayPort support-no data
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration-no data
CrossFire1no data
Enduro-no data
FreeSync1no data
HD3D-no data
PowerTune-no data
TrueAudio-no data
ZeroCore-no data
DDMA audio+no data
High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)no data128bit

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkanno dataN/A
Mantle-no data
CUDAno data+

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.37 1.25
Recency 13 February 2014 29 October 2007
Cost $149 $349
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 105 Watt

The Radeon R7 265 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800 GT in performance tests.


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

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 R7 265
Radeon R7 265
NVIDIA GeForce 8800 GT
GeForce 8800 GT

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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

Community ratings

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


3.1 368 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 573 votes

Rate GeForce 8800 GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.