Radeon PRO W7800 vs GeForce 8800M GTS

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 8800M GTS with Radeon PRO W7800, including specs and performance data.

8800M GTS
2007
512 MB GDDR3, 50 Watt
0.99

PRO W7800 outperforms 8800M GTS by a whopping 7390% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking111213
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data30.37
Power efficiency0.456.49
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameG92Navi 31
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 November 2007 (16 years ago)13 April 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$2,499

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 cores644480
CUDA cores64no data
Core clock speed500 MHz1855 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2499 MHz
Number of transistors754 million57,700 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)50 Watt260 Watt
Texture fill rate16.00699.7
Floating-point processing power0.16 TFLOPS44.78 TFLOPS
ROPs16128
TMUs32280
Ray Tracing Coresno data70

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
InterfaceMXM-HEPCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data280 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data2x 8-pin

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB32 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/s576.0 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 outputs3x DisplayPort 2.1, 1x mini-DisplayPort 2.1

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.7
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.2
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA1.1-

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.

8800M GTS 0.99
PRO W7800 74.15
+7390%

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.

8800M GTS 382
PRO W7800 28601
+7387%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−7233%
220−230
+7233%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−6900%
350−400
+6900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−7150%
290−300
+7150%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−7233%
220−230
+7233%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−6900%
140−150
+6900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−6900%
350−400
+6900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7208%
950−1000
+7208%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−7043%
500−550
+7043%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−7244%
2350−2400
+7244%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−6900%
350−400
+6900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−7150%
290−300
+7150%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−7233%
220−230
+7233%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−6900%
140−150
+6900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−6900%
350−400
+6900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7208%
950−1000
+7208%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−7043%
500−550
+7043%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−6900%
700−750
+6900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−7244%
2350−2400
+7244%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−6900%
350−400
+6900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−7150%
290−300
+7150%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−7233%
220−230
+7233%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Hitman 3 5−6
−6900%
350−400
+6900%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−7208%
950−1000
+7208%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−7043%
500−550
+7043%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−6900%
700−750
+6900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−7244%
2350−2400
+7244%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Hitman 3 7−8
−7043%
500−550
+7043%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−7150%
290−300
+7150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−7150%
290−300
+7150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−7233%
220−230
+7233%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−6900%
70−75
+6900%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−6900%
140−150
+6900%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.99 74.15
Recency 1 November 2007 13 April 2023
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 32 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 50 Watt 260 Watt

8800M GTS has 420% lower power consumption.

PRO W7800, on the other hand, has a 7389.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1200% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7800 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800M GTS in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce 8800M GTS is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W7800 is a workstation 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 8800M GTS
GeForce 8800M GTS
AMD Radeon PRO W7800
Radeon PRO W7800

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.


2.2 17 votes

Rate GeForce 8800M GTS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 31 vote

Rate Radeon PRO W7800 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.