GeForce Go 6800 Ultra vs UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H)
Aggregate performance score
We've compared UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) and GeForce Go 6800 Ultra, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
Graphics 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) outperforms 6800 Ultra by a whopping 1212% 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 | 709 | 1359 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 0.28 |
| Architecture | Gen. 12 (2021−2023) | Curie (2003−2013) |
| GPU code name | Tiger Lake Xe | NV41 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 11 May 2021 (4 years ago) | 24 February 2005 (20 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 | 32 | 17 |
| Core clock speed | 350 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1450 MHz | 450 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 190 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 10 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 89 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 5.400 |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 12 |
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 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 1.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
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 | 256 MB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | no data | 600 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 38.4 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 | Portable Device Dependent |
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 | 2.0 (full) 2.1 (partial) |
| 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 | 17
+1600%
| 1−2
−1600%
|
| 1440p | 30
+1400%
| 2−3
−1400%
|
| 4K | 12 | 0−1 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 53
+1225%
|
4−5
−1225%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 10
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 18
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 34
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 14
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| Fortnite | 24−27
+2500%
|
1−2
−2500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+425%
|
4−5
−425%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 16
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+157%
|
7−8
−157%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+119%
|
24−27
−119%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 16
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 15
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 75−80
+450%
|
14−16
−450%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Dota 2 | 36
+260%
|
10−11
−260%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 13 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 24−27
+2500%
|
1−2
−2500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+425%
|
4−5
−425%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 11 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+157%
|
7−8
−157%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16
+220%
|
5−6
−220%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+119%
|
24−27
−119%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 15
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10
+800%
|
1−2
−800%
|
| Dota 2 | 33
+230%
|
10−11
−230%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+425%
|
4−5
−425%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20
+157%
|
7−8
−157%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8
+60%
|
5−6
−60%
|
| Valorant | 55−60
+119%
|
24−27
−119%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 24−27
+2500%
|
1−2
−2500%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 30−35
+750%
|
4−5
−750%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+1467%
|
3−4
−1467%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Escape from Tarkov | 8−9
+300%
|
2−3
−300%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+14.3%
|
14−16
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 21−24
+1000%
|
2−3
−1000%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 12 | 0−1 |
| Escape from Tarkov | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 5−6
+400%
|
1−2
−400%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
This is how UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) and Go 6800 Ultra compete in popular games:
- UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 1600% faster in 1080p
- UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 1400% faster in 1440p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Valorant, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is 1000% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) surpassed Go 6800 Ultra in all 27 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.33 | 0.33 |
| Recency | 11 May 2021 | 24 February 2005 |
| Chip lithography | 10 nm | 130 nm |
UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) has a 1212.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 16 years, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.
The UHD Graphics Xe 32EUs (Tiger Lake-H) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce Go 6800 Ultra 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.
