GeForce 8600 GT vs UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)

Place in the ranking	372	1313
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	64.57	0.47
Architecture	no data	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Rocket Lake GT1	G84
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	30 March 2021 (3 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	no data	32
Core clock speed	no data	540 MHz
Number of transistors	no data	289 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	47 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	8.640
Floating-point processing power	no data	0.07616 TFLOPS
ROPs	no data	8
TMUs	no data	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).

Interface	no data	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	no data	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	no data	512 MB
Standard memory config per GPU	no data	256 MB
Memory bus width	no data	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	700 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	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 data

2x DVI, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	no data	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	no data	4.0
OpenGL	no data	2.1
OpenCL	no data	1.1
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.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD

-0−1

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	24−27	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	0−1
Elden Ring	40−45	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +4500%	1−2 −4500%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	14	0−1
Metro Exodus	10	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40	0−1
Valorant	55−60 +5500%	1−2 −5500%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +4500%	1−2 −4500%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	0−1
Dota 2	13	0−1
Elden Ring	40−45	0−1
Far Cry 5	18	0−1
Fortnite	75−80 +7800%	1−2 −7800%
Forza Horizon 4	12	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	6	0−1
Metro Exodus	7	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 +5000%	2−3 −5000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	40−45	0−1
Valorant	55−60 +5500%	1−2 −5500%
World of Tanks	180−190 +4550%	4−5 −4550%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +4500%	1−2 −4500%
Counter-Strike 2	24−27	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	27−30	0−1
Dota 2	25	0−1
Far Cry 5	50−55 +5200%	1−2 −5200%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +5600%	1−2 −5600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	100−110 +5000%	2−3 −5000%
Valorant	55−60 +5500%	1−2 −5500%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	20−22	0−1
Elden Ring	21−24	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	20−22	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120 +5750%	2−3 −5750%
Red Dead Redemption 2	12−14	0−1
World of Tanks	95−100 +4850%	2−3 −4850%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	12−14	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	10−11	0−1
Far Cry 5	30−35	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	30−35	0−1
Metro Exodus	30−33	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20	0−1
Valorant	35−40	0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	9−10	0−1
Dota 2	24−27	0−1
Elden Ring	9−10	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27	0−1
Metro Exodus	9−10	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	9−10	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5	0−1
Dota 2	24−27	0−1
Far Cry 5	18−20	0−1
Fortnite	16−18	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	18−20	0−1
Valorant	14−16	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	14.07	0.32
Recency	30 March 2021	17 April 2007
Chip lithography	14 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	15 Watt	47 Watt

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) has a 4296.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 471.4% more advanced lithography process, and 213.3% lower power consumption.

The UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8600 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake) 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.