GeForce GTX 1650 vs 8700M GT SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8700M GT SLI with GeForce GTX 1650, including specs and performance data.

8700M GT SLI
2007
1 GB GDDR3, 58 Watt
0.79

GTX 1650 outperforms 8700M GT SLI by a whopping 2482% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1142264
Place by popularitynot in top-1003
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data39.45
Power efficiency0.9418.84
ArchitectureG8x (2007)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameNB8E-SETU117
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date18 September 2007 (17 years ago)23 April 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores64896
Core clock speed625 MHz1485 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1665 MHz
Number of transistors578 Million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology80 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)58 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data93.24
Floating-point processing powerno data2.984 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data56

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 sizelargeno data
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data128.0 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 data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
HDMI-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX1012 (12_1)
Shader Modelno data6.5
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA-7.5

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.

8700M GT SLI 0.79
GTX 1650 20.40
+2482%

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.

8700M GT SLI 2196
GTX 1650 44694
+1935%

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 HD2−3
−3250%
67
+3250%
1440p1−2
−3600%
37
+3600%
4K0−124

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.22
1440pno data4.03
4Kno data6.21

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−960%
53
+960%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−1633%
52
+1633%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Far Cry 5 0−1 64
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−7900%
80
+7900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−880%
49
+880%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−2333%
292
+2333%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 77
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−1817%
115
+1817%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−623%
224
+623%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−1560%
83
+1560%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−1433%
46
+1433%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Far Cry 5 0−1 52
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−5500%
56
+5500%
Hitman 3 5−6
−840%
47
+840%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−2067%
260
+2067%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 55
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−1133%
74
+1133%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−360%
45−50
+360%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−565%
206
+565%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−400%
25
+400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−167%
8
+167%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−967%
30−35
+967%
Far Cry 5 0−1 39
Hitman 3 5−6
−720%
41
+720%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−400%
60
+400%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−933%
62
+933%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−320%
42
+320%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+47.6%
21
−47.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 54

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 42
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−3500%
36
+3500%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 18
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1100%
12−14
+1100%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2300%
24
+2300%
Hitman 3 7−8
−286%
27
+286%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−975%
43
+975%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 24−27
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−7150%
145
+7150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−1067%
35
+1067%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 17

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−1200%
13
+1200%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 5
Far Cry 5 0−1 12

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−750%
17
+750%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 47
+0%
47
+0%
Battlefield 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 229
+0%
229
+0%
Metro Exodus 101
+0%
101
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 35
+0%
35
+0%
Battlefield 5 72
+0%
72
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 201
+0%
201
+0%
Metro Exodus 71
+0%
71
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+0%
13
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65
+0%
65
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 13
+0%
13
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 122
+0%
122
+0%
Metro Exodus 41
+0%
41
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 45
+0%
45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Hitman 3 13
+0%
13
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 41
+0%
41
+0%
Metro Exodus 27
+0%
27
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 26
+0%
26
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+0%
30
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 26
+0%
26
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 8
+0%
8
+0%

This is how 8700M GT SLI and GTX 1650 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1650 is 3250% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1650 is 3600% faster in 1440p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the 8700M GT SLI is 48% faster.
  • in Far Cry New Dawn, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1650 is 7900% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • 8700M GT SLI is ahead in 1 test (2%)
  • GTX 1650 is ahead in 34 tests (57%)
  • there's a draw in 25 tests (42%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.79 20.40
Recency 18 September 2007 23 April 2019
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 4 GB
Chip lithography 80 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 58 Watt 75 Watt

8700M GT SLI has 29.3% lower power consumption.

GTX 1650, on the other hand, has a 2482.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 566.7% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GTX 1650 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8700M GT SLI in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8700M GT SLI is a notebook card while GeForce GTX 1650 is a desktop one.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce 8700M GT SLI
GeForce 8700M GT SLI
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650
GeForce GTX 1650

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.


2 4 votes

Rate GeForce 8700M GT SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 23149 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1650 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.