Radeon Vega 7 vs GeForce 8700M GT

Place in the ranking	1316	537
Place by popularity	not in top-100	10
Power efficiency	0.77	11.44
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code name	G84	Cezanne
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 June 2007 (17 years ago)	13 April 2021 (3 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	448
Core clock speed	625 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1900 MHz
Number of transistors	289 million	9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	80 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	29 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	10.00	53.20
Floating-point processing power	0.08 TFLOPS	1.702 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	8
TMUs	16	28

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	large	no data
Interface	MXM-HE	IGP
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	GDDR3	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	System Shared
Memory bus width	128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	25.6 GB/s	no data
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 Connectors

No outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.4
OpenGL	3.3	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	1.1	-

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	0−1	23
1440p	1−2 −2400%	25 +2400%
4K	0−1	15

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −2067%	65−70 +2067%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −2067%	65−70 +2067%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −383%	29 +383%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −575%	27 +575%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −2067%	65−70 +2067%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −300%	28 +300%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −300%	24 +300%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 −667%	46 +667%
Red Dead Redemption 2	4−5 −425%	21−24 +425%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	5−6 −360%	21−24 +360%
World of Tanks	12−14 −346%	58 +346%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2	6−7 −133%	14−16 +133%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −2067%	65−70 +2067%
Far Cry 5	7−8 −371%	30−35 +371%
Forza Horizon 4	6−7 −250%	21 +250%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	6−7 −900%	60−65 +900%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS

2−3

−2150%

45−50
+2150%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −2067%	65−70 +2067%
Far Cry 5	4−5 −300%	16−18 +300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5 −2150%	90−95 +2150%
Valorant	4−5 −375%	18−20 +375%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 −1900%	300−310 +1900%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	1−2 −2100%	21−24 +2100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 −20%	18−20 +20%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	0−1	6−7
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 −2150%	45−50 +2150%
Dota 2	14−16 −1900%	300−310 +1900%
Valorant	0−1	7−8

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	18 +0%	18 +0%
Metro Exodus	21 +0%	21 +0%
Valorant	29 +0%	29 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Dota 2	17 +0%	17 +0%
Fortnite	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	15 +0%	15 +0%
Valorant	14 +0%	14 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	12 +0%	12 +0%
Valorant	25 +0%	25 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
World of Tanks	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Metro Exodus	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%

4K
High Preset

Metro Exodus	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Fortnite	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%

This is how 8700M GT and Vega 7 compete in popular games:

Vega 7 is 2400% faster in 1440p

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

in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the Vega 7 is 2100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Vega 7 is ahead in 20 tests (42%)
there's a draw in 28 tests (58%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.31	7.14
Recency	1 June 2007	13 April 2021
Chip lithography	80 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	29 Watt	45 Watt

8700M GT has 55.2% lower power consumption.

Vega 7, on the other hand, has a 2203.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, and a 1042.9% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon Vega 7 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8700M GT in performance tests.

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