Radeon HD 8610G vs GeForce 9700M GTS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9700M GTS and Radeon HD 8610G, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

9700M GTS
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 60 Watt
0.72

HD 8610G outperforms 9700M GTS by an impressive 50% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking11651085
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.84no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Terascale 3 (2010−2013)
GPU code nameG94Richland
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date29 July 2008 (16 years ago)23 May 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 cores48384
Core clock speed530 MHz533 MHz
Boost clock speedno data626 MHz
Number of transistors505 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm32 nm
Power consumption (TDP)60 Wattno data
Texture fill rate12.72no data
Floating-point processing power0.1272 TFLOPSno data
Gigaflops180no data
ROPs16no data
TMUs24no 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 sizelargemedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data

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 typeGDDR3no data
Maximum RAM amount512 MBno data
Memory bus width256 Bitno data
Memory clock speed800 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth51.2 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL3.3no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
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.

9700M GTS 0.72
HD 8610G 1.08
+50%

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.

9700M GTS 278
HD 8610G 415
+49.3%

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.

9700M GTS 2825
+28.2%
HD 8610G 2203

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:

Full HD8−9
−50%
12
+50%

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 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 1−2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−3.2%
30−35
+3.2%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 1−2
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−3.2%
30−35
+3.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
−25%
5−6
+25%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−12
−18.2%
12−14
+18.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−3.2%
30−35
+3.2%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 1−2

1440p
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 1−2
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−150%
5−6
+150%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 0−1 0−1

This is how 9700M GTS and HD 8610G compete in popular games:

  • HD 8610G is 50% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1440p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the HD 8610G is 150% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • HD 8610G is ahead in 24 tests (57%)
  • there's a draw in 18 tests (43%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.72 1.08
Recency 29 July 2008 23 May 2013
Chip lithography 65 nm 32 nm

HD 8610G has a 50% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon HD 8610G is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9700M GTS in performance tests.


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 9700M GTS
GeForce 9700M GTS
AMD Radeon HD 8610G
Radeon HD 8610G

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate GeForce 9700M GTS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.2 27 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8610G 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.