Arc A770M vs GeForce 8800 GT

Place in the ranking	1059	188
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.03	no data
Power efficiency	0.67	17.81
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Generation 12.7 (2022−2023)
GPU code name	G92	DG2-512
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	29 October 2007 (17 years ago)	2022 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$349	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores	112	4096
Core clock speed	600 MHz	1650 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2050 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	21,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	105 Watt	120 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	33.60	524.8
Floating-point processing power	0.336 TFLOPS	16.79 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	128
TMUs	56	256
Tensor Cores	no data	512
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	32

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
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	229 mm	no data
Height	Single Slot	no data
Width	1-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no data
SLI options	2-way	-

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	GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	16 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	57.6 GB/s	512.0 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 Connectors	Dual Link DVIHDTV	Portable Device Dependent
Multi monitor support	+	no data
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)

128bit

no data

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.6
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	3.0
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
CUDA	+	-

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.

8800 GT 1.18

Arc A770M 29.91
+2435%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

8800 GT 468

Arc A770M 11908
+2444%

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	3−4 −3067%	95 +3067%
1440p	2−3 −2650%	55 +2650%
4K	1−2 −3900%	40 +3900%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	116.33	no data
1440p	174.50	no data
4K	349.00	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	113 +0%	113 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	48 +0%	48 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	256 +0%	256 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Metro Exodus	100 +0%	100 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Valorant	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	39 +0%	39 +0%
Dota 2	58 +0%	58 +0%
Far Cry 5	56 +0%	56 +0%
Fortnite	140−150 +0%	140−150 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	211 +0%	211 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	86 +0%	86 +0%
Metro Exodus	82 +0%	82 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Valorant	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%
World of Tanks	270−280 +0%	270−280 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	90−95 +0%	90−95 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	33 +0%	33 +0%
Dota 2	100−110 +0%	100−110 +0%
Far Cry 5	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	179 +0%	179 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Valorant	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	170−180 +0%	170−180 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
World of Tanks	200−210 +0%	200−210 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	22 +0%	22 +0%
Far Cry 5	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Metro Exodus	70−75 +0%	70−75 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Valorant	85−90 +0%	85−90 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Dota 2	45 +0%	45 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	45 +0%	45 +0%
Metro Exodus	37 +0%	37 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	95−100 +0%	95−100 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	20−22 +0%	20−22 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	45 +0%	45 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	11 +0%	11 +0%
Dota 2	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Fortnite	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	74 +0%	74 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Valorant	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%

This is how 8800 GT and Arc A770M compete in popular games:

Arc A770M is 3067% faster in 1080p
Arc A770M is 2650% faster in 1440p
Arc A770M is 3900% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.18	29.91
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	16 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	105 Watt	120 Watt

8800 GT has 14.3% lower power consumption.

Arc A770M, on the other hand, has a 2434.7% higher aggregate performance score, a 3100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Arc A770M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8800 GT is a desktop card while Arc A770M is a notebook one.

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