GeForce 8300 vs Radeon R7 (Carrizo)

Place in the ranking	892	1354
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	3.97	0.45
Architecture	GCN 1.2/2.0 (2015−2016)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Carrizo	C78
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	4 June 2015 (9 years ago)	17 April 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	512	16
Core clock speed	no data	500 MHz
Boost clock speed	800 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2410 Million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12-35 Watt	40 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	4.000
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.048 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	4
TMUs	no data	8

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	no data
Interface	no data	PCI
Width	no data	IGP

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	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	no data	System Shared
Memory bus width	64/128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	no data	System Shared
Shared memory	+	no data

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

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (FL 12_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	no data	4.0
OpenGL	no data	3.3
OpenCL	no data	N/A
Vulkan	-	N/A

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

10
+900%

1−2

−900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Elden Ring	3−4	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Dota 2	4−5	0−1
Elden Ring	3−4	0−1
Far Cry 5	12−14 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Fortnite	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Grand Theft Auto V	4−5	0−1
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	20−22 +900%	2−3 −900%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3	0−1
World of Tanks	24 +700%	3−4 −700%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Cyberpunk 2077	5−6	0−1
Dota 2	4−5	0−1
Far Cry 5	12−14 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	20−22 +900%	2−3 −900%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring	1−2	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	12−14 +1200%	1−2 −1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
World of Tanks	12−14 +1200%	1−2 −1200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4	0−1
Far Cry 5	6−7	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3−4	0−1
Valorant	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Elden Ring	0−1	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +1400%	1−2 −1400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Dota 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Fortnite	0−1	0−1
Valorant	2−3	0−1

This is how R7 (Carrizo) and GeForce 8300 compete in popular games:

R7 (Carrizo) is 900% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	2.02	0.26
Recency	4 June 2015	17 April 2007
Chip lithography	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	12 Watt	40 Watt

R7 (Carrizo) has a 676.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 (Carrizo) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8300 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 (Carrizo) is a notebook card while GeForce 8300 is a desktop one.

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