ATI Radeon 8500 XT vs GeForce 8800 Ultra

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking939not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
Power efficiency0.67no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Rage 7 (2001−2006)
GPU code nameG80R250
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date2 May 2007 (17 years ago)1 June 2002 (22 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$829 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 cores612no data
Core clock speed612 MHz300 MHz
Number of transistors681 million60 million
Manufacturing process technology90 nm150 nm
Power consumption (TDP)171 Watt25 Watt
Texture fill rate39.172.400
Floating-point processing power0.3871 TFLOPSno data
ROPs244
TMUs328

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16AGP 4x
Length270 mmno data
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone
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 typeGDDR3DDR
Maximum RAM amount512 MB128 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1080 MHz300 MHz
Memory bandwidth103.7 GB/s9.6 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-Video1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)8.1
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.31.4
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA+-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 2 May 2007 1 June 2002
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 128 MB
Chip lithography 90 nm 150 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 171 Watt 25 Watt

8800 Ultra has an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 66.7% more advanced lithography process.

ATI 8500 XT, on the other hand, has 584% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 8800 Ultra and Radeon 8500 XT. We've got no test results to judge.


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 8800 Ultra
GeForce 8800 Ultra
ATI Radeon 8500 XT
Radeon 8500 XT

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.


4.2 29 votes

Rate GeForce 8800 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon 8500 XT 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.