GeForce GT 735M vs 8800 GTX

Place in the ranking	971	936
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.02	no data
Power efficiency	0.69	3.57
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code name	G80	GK208
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	8 November 2006 (18 years ago)	1 April 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$599	no data

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 cores	575	384
Core clock speed	576 MHz	575 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	889 MHz
Number of transistors	681 million	915 million
Manufacturing process technology	90 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	155 Watt	33 Watt
Texture fill rate	36.86	18.40
Floating-point processing power	0.3456 TFLOPS	0.4416 TFLOPS
ROPs	24	8
TMUs	32	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).

Bus support	no data	PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 1.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	270 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	no data
SLI options	+	-

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	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	768 MB	2 GB
Standard memory configuration	no data	DDR3
Memory bus width	384 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	86.4 GB/s	14.4 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	2x DVI, 1x S-Video	No outputs
eDP 1.2 signal support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
LVDS signal support	no data	Up to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display support	no data	Up to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
HDMI	-	+
HDCP content protection	-	+
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	-	+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	-	+

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support	-	+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	-	+
Optimus	-	+
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 API
Shader Model	4.0	5.1
OpenGL	3.3	4.5
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.126
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 GTX 1.53

GT 735M 1.69
+10.5%

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 GTX 590

GT 735M 650
+10.2%

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:

900p	14−16 −21.4%	17 +21.4%
Full HD	18−20 −11.1%	20 +11.1%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

33.28

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

1−2

+0%

1−2

+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	0−1	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

+0%

3−4

+0%

This is how 8800 GTX and GT 735M compete in popular games:

GT 735M is 21% faster in 900p
GT 735M is 11% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 51 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.53	1.69
Recency	8 November 2006	1 April 2013
Maximum RAM amount	768 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	90 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	155 Watt	33 Watt

GT 735M has a 10.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 369.7% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 735M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800 GTX in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8800 GTX is a desktop card while GeForce GT 735M is a notebook one.

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