GeForce GT 230M vs 8800M GTX

Place in the ranking	1048	1211
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.28	1.66
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	G92	GT216
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 November 2007 (17 years ago)	15 June 2009 (15 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	96	48
Core clock speed	500 MHz	500 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	486 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	23 Watt
Texture fill rate	24.00	8.000
Floating-point processing power	0.24 TFLOPS	0.1056 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	no data	158
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	48	16

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	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	MXM-HE	PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	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	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	Up to 1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	Up to 600 (DDR2), Up to 800 (GDDR3), Up to 1066 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth	51.2 GB/s	16 (DDR2), 25 (DDR3)
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	Dual Link DVIVGADisplayPortHDMISingle Link DVI
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	HDA

Supported technologies

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

Power management

no data

8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	4.0	4.1
OpenGL	3.3	2.1
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	N/A	N/A
CUDA	1.1	+

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 GTX 1.20
+118%

GT 230M 0.55

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 GTX 462
+118%

GT 230M 212

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

8800M GTX 3422
+44.8%

GT 230M 2363

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

+0%

3−4

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +200%	1−2 −200%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 +25%	4−5 −25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	1−2	0−1
Hitman 3	6−7 +20%	5−6 −20%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +27.3%	10−12 −27.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +10%	10−11 −10%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +6.7%	30−33 −6.7%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +100%	1−2 −100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +16.7%	6−7 −16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 +33.3%	3−4 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	5−6 +400%	1−2 −400%