GeForce 7800 GT vs UHD Graphics G7 (Lakefield GT2 64 EU)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared UHD Graphics G7 (Lakefield GT2 64 EU) with GeForce 7800 GT, including specs and performance data.
Graphics G7 (Lakefield GT2 64 EU) outperforms 7800 GT by a whopping 300% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 893 | 1263 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.01 |
| Power efficiency | 25.56 | 0.69 |
| Architecture | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | Lakefield GT2 | G70 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 28 May 2020 (5 years ago) | 11 August 2005 (20 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $449 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 64 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 500 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 302 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 8.000 |
| ROPs | no data | 16 |
| TMUs | no data | 20 |
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).
| Interface | no data | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 226 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin |
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 | DDR4 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 32 GB/s |
| Shared memory | + | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Quick Sync | + | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 9.0c (9_3) |
| Shader Model | no data | 3.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 2.1 |
| 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 | 13
+333%
| 3−4
−333%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 149.67 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Fortnite | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+320%
|
10−11
−320%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 45−50
+360%
|
10−11
−360%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Dota 2 | 15
+400%
|
3−4
−400%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Fortnite | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+320%
|
10−11
−320%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Dota 2 | 15
+400%
|
3−4
−400%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 9−10
+350%
|
2−3
−350%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+320%
|
10−11
−320%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 10−12
+450%
|
2−3
−450%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 16−18
+325%
|
4−5
−325%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 21−24
+340%
|
5−6
−340%
|
| Valorant | 18−20
+375%
|
4−5
−375%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Escape from Tarkov | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+400%
|
3−4
−400%
|
| Valorant | 12−14
+300%
|
3−4
−300%
|
4K
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4 | 0−1 |
This is how UHD Graphics G7 (Lakefield GT2 64 EU) and 7800 GT compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics G7 (Lakefield GT2 64 EU) is 333% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.32 | 0.58 |
| Recency | 28 May 2020 | 11 August 2005 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 110 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 65 Watt |
UHD Graphics G7 (Lakefield GT2 64 EU) has a 300% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 14 years, a 1000% more advanced lithography process, and 828.6% lower power consumption.
The UHD Graphics G7 (Lakefield GT2 64 EU) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 7800 GT in performance tests.
Be aware that UHD Graphics G7 (Lakefield GT2 64 EU) is a notebook graphics card while GeForce 7800 GT is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
