Radeon HD 8650M vs GeForce 8800M GTX

Place in the ranking	1051	877
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.28	no data
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	GCN (2012−2015)
GPU code name	G92	no data
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 November 2007 (17 years ago)	7 January 2013 (11 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	384
Core clock speed	500 MHz	650 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	900 Million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	24.00	no data
Floating-point processing power	0.24 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	16	no data
TMUs	48	no data

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
Interface	MXM-HE	no data
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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	800 MHz	4500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	51.2 GB/s	no data
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

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	11.1
Shader Model	4.0	no data
OpenGL	3.3	no data
OpenCL	1.1	no data
Vulkan	N/A	-
CUDA	1.1	-

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

−33.3%

4−5
+33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −66.7%	5−6 +66.7%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −100%	4−5 +100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −40%	7−8 +40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Forza Horizon 4	1−2 −600%	7−8 +600%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −21.4%	16−18 +21.4%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −9.4%	35−40 +9.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−100%

4−5
+100%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −200%	3−4 +200%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	1−2
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −50%	6−7 +50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	1−2
Watch Dogs: Legion	5−6 −100%	10−11 +100%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

4−5

−25%

5−6
+25%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

0−1

1−2

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	0−1	1−2

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−50%

3−4
+50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5

1−2

+0%

1−2

+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5

1−2

+0%

1−2

+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Watch Dogs: Legion

0−1

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the HD 8650M is 600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 8650M is ahead in 40 tests (82%)
there's a draw in 9 tests (18%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.20	2.04
Recency	1 November 2007	7 January 2013
Maximum RAM amount	512 MB	2 GB
Chip lithography	65 nm	28 nm

HD 8650M has a 70% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 8650M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8800M GTX in performance tests.

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