GeForce 8800M GTS vs Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) and GeForce 8800M GTS, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 (Bristol Ridge)
2016
12 Watt
1.96
+98%

R7 (Bristol Ridge) outperforms 8800M GTS by an impressive 98% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking9031108
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency3.011.37
ArchitectureGCN 1.2 (2016)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameBristol RidgeG92
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)1 November 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 cores51264
Core clock speedno data500 MHz
Boost clock speed900 MHzno data
Number of transistors2410 Million754 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)12-45 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rateno data16.00
Floating-point processing powerno data0.16 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data32

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
Interfaceno dataMXM-HE

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 typeno dataGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountno data512 MB
Memory bus width64/128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data800 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data51.2 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (FL 12_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Modelno data4.0
OpenGLno data3.3
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-1.1

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.

R7 (Bristol Ridge) 1.96
+98%
8800M GTS 0.99

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

R7 (Bristol Ridge) 754
+97.4%
8800M GTS 382

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.

R7 (Bristol Ridge) 5568
+118%
8800M GTS 2552

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 HD13
+117%
6−7
−117%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Elden Ring 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Dota 2 9
+125%
4−5
−125%
Elden Ring 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Fortnite 10−11
+233%
3−4
−233%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Grand Theft Auto V 5
+150%
2−3
−150%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 26
+117%
12−14
−117%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
World of Tanks 35−40
+65.2%
21−24
−65.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Dota 2 14
+100%
7−8
−100%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+44.4%
9−10
−44.4%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+160%
5−6
−160%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
World of Tanks 12−14
+140%
5−6
−140%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Valorant 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+6.7%
14−16
−6.7%
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Valorant 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

This is how R7 (Bristol Ridge) and 8800M GTS compete in popular games:

  • R7 (Bristol Ridge) is 117% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the R7 (Bristol Ridge) is 233% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R7 (Bristol Ridge) is ahead in 30 tests (86%)
  • there's a draw in 5 tests (14%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.96 0.99
Recency 1 June 2016 1 November 2007
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 50 Watt

R7 (Bristol Ridge) has a 98% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 316.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800M GTS 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 (Bristol Ridge)
Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)
NVIDIA GeForce 8800M GTS
GeForce 8800M GTS

Other comparisons

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.


3.6 42 votes

Rate Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.2 17 votes

Rate GeForce 8800M GTS 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.