GeForce 8600 GT vs GTX 765M

Place in the ranking	618	1309
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	4.81	0.47
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GK106	G84
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	30 May 2013 (11 years ago)	17 April 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$159

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 cores	768	32
Core clock speed	850 MHz	540 MHz
Boost clock speed	863 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,540 million	289 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	47 Watt
Texture fill rate	55.23	8.640
Floating-point processing power	1.326 TFLOPS	0.07616 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	64	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	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 1.0 x16
Length	no data	170 mm
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None
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	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	512 MB
Standard memory configuration	GDDR5	no data
Standard memory config per GPU	no data	256 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	2000 MHz	700 MHz
Memory bandwidth	64.0 GB/s	22.4 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 Connectors	No outputs	2x DVI, 1x S-Video
eDP 1.2 signal support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
LVDS signal support	Up to 1920x1200	no data
VGA аnalog display support	Up to 2048x1536	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	Up to 3840x2160	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP content protection	+	-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	+	-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	+	-

Supported technologies

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

Blu-Ray 3D Support	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 API	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	2.1
OpenCL	1.1	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	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.

GTX 765M 5.18
+1519%

8600 GT 0.32

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.

GTX 765M 1997
+1524%

8600 GT 123

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:

900p	51 +1600%	3−4 −1600%
Full HD	39 +1850%	2−3 −1850%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

79.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

9−10

0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6	0−1
Battlefield 5	12−14	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−12	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +1550%	2−3 −1550%
Hitman 3	10−12	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +1550%	2−3 −1550%
Metro Exodus	12−14	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +2250%	2−3 −2250%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6	0−1
Battlefield 5	12−14	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−12	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	14−16	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +1550%	2−3 −1550%
Hitman 3	10−12	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +1550%	2−3 −1550%
Metro Exodus	12−14	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +2250%	2−3 −2250%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	5−6	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	10−12	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	9−10	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−12	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	30−35 +1550%	2−3 −1550%
Hitman 3	10−12	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +1550%	2−3 −1550%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	45−50 +2250%	2−3 −2250%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	10−11	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	8−9	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	5−6	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	6−7	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	12−14	0−1
Hitman 3	9−10	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14	0−1
Metro Exodus	3−4	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4−5	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +1550%	2−3 −1550%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	4−5	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4	0−1
Hitman 3	1−2	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9	0−1
Metro Exodus	2−3	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	1−2	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	3−4	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	2−3	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	0−1	0−1
Far Cry 5	3−4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	4−5	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	1−2	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

6−7

0−1

This is how GTX 765M and 8600 GT compete in popular games:

GTX 765M is 1600% faster in 900p
GTX 765M is 1850% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	5.18	0.32
Recency	30 May 2013	17 April 2007
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	47 Watt

GTX 765M has a 1518.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

8600 GT, on the other hand, has 59.6% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 765M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8600 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 765M is a notebook card while GeForce 8600 GT is a desktop one.

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