gpu chart comparison

I googled it and can't seem to find a gpu chart comparison. I think I have pretty much found the laptop I need to play TERA online on max settings, but the only thing stumping me right now is the darn gpu requirements.

Is NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M with 3GB GDDR5 VRAM better than or equal to NVIDIA Geforce 8800GT? If not where is it on the graphics card ladder?

 

Should be close to a GTX 460 "desktop"

 

The 8800GT is roughly equivalent to a GTX 260M, which is far below a GTX 670M. You can compare the 260M and 670M (and any other graphics cards) at Computer Games on Laptop Graphic Cards - Notebookcheck.net Tech.

 

an 8800 GT is close to a 640m in performance, the 670m is quite a bit faster.

 

Game requirement will almost never list mobile cards. The desktop 8800 GT is just slightly slower than GTX670M due to smaller memory bandwidth. And is close to a desktop GTX460.

Desktop 8800 GT
Texture Fill rate: 33.6 billion/s
Memory bandwidth: 57.6 GB/s

Laptop GTX670M
Texture Fill rate: 33.5 billion/s
Memory bandwidth: 72.0 GB/s

Some of you might have mixed it up with the laptop's 8800 GTS/8800 GTX which are sitting close to the Fermi 640M LE(laptop 8800 GTS)/260M(laptop 8800 GTX).

 

GTX 480

GPU Engine Specs:
480CUDA Cores
700 MHzGraphics Clock (MHz)
1401 MHzProcessor Clock (MHz)
42Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec)
Memory Specs:
1848 MHz (3696 data rate)Memory Clock
1536 MBStandard Memory Config
GDDR5Memory Interface
384-bitMemory Interface Width
177.4Memory Bandwidth (GB/sec)


GTX 280


GPU Engine Specs:
240CUDA Cores1
602MHzGraphics Clock (MHz)
1296MHzProcessor Clock (MHz)
48.2Texture Fill Rate (billion/sec)
Memory Specs:
1107MHzMemory Clock
1GBStandard Memory Config
512-bitMemory Interface Width5
141.7


So with your logic the GTX 280 and GTX 480 are pretty close despite in games the GTX 480 is 2 X faster.

GK107 destroys the GF192. I don't care if Jesus OC'ed it for you and your cooling it with holy water the 8800GT has no chance against a GTX 670m its like Mike Tyson fighting in the Special Olympics.

If you wanna compare numbers that reflect the cards look at the GF192's 112sp's to the GTX 670's 336 cuda cores.


Bottom line GTX 670m much much faster then the 8800GT. I ran a 8800GT back in the day and it was slow. I check some bench's to see some games fps and ran them on my overclocked GTX 660m and my framerates were all 2 X higher.




I went ahead had a buddy run Crysis 2 on his 8800gt. 15fps on ultra. MY GTX 660m overclocked was pulling 37 in the same benckmark. Proof is in the pudding.

 

Yes the GTX480 is faster in game and can handle anti-aliasing much better than the GTX280, however when it comes to pure texture filtering, the GTX280 is about 15% faster.

This is like comparing different generation's cuda core. And this method would fail when comparing Fermi with Kepler.

You can't just run a modern game and compare the FPS like that mate. A good way to compare is to run 3DMark03.

Also are you sure your friend's 8800GT has at least 2GB of VRAM? Because Crysis 2 ultra uses 1.9GB with hi-res pack enabled.

 

This is some nonsense, seriously. If You want to compare 2 GPUs, You do that with the most up-to-date software (benchmarks or games), not by comparing only one parameter of these GPUs. Anyway, regardless of whether in benchmarks or games, a GTX670M will smoke the desktop 8800GT out of the water, period. Texture filtering is only one of many things that a GPU does, so You can't measure the performance of a GPU only by taking it's texture filtering rate into consideration.

 

I disagree here. The OP was asking about game performance and comparing how one card did against another in the same game is a good indication of difference ( at least for that game ).

Running benchmarks means almost nothing to actual game performance.

 

The thing is OP wanted to compare the semi-new (rebagged Fermi) to an ancient card, and it's true that the GTX670M is much stronger in many areas and of course will perform much better when it comes to gaming. However when you compare the raw performance of both cards, they come close in texture filtering. I was taking this technically, not generally.

 

You guys respond really quick and thank you to everyone. You have answered my question. I'm just going to go ahead and stick with the ASUS G75VW-DS72. Even though I am a little worried about prostar reputation right now. I heard some bad stuff about them. Couldn't find another place that would let me config that model.

 

you can get a sager with a better GPU for the same price.

 

1 Fermi core does not equal 1 Kepler core. Its more like 1 Fermi core equals 2.3 Kepler cores or something. Then you have the memory bandwidth and the memory crap on top of that.

And you can`t compare his 8800GT with your 660M looking at FPS. Well you can, but you probably have a totally different machine. Meaning you have more RAM, faster RAM, faster CPU (not to even mention that his CPU is much less effective than your Ivy Bridge). Things like this affect the FPS.

 

That's right, also Crysis 2 doesn't fully rely on the GPU, also a potential amount of CPU usage is required. There's also this hyper threading technology that makes games like Crysis 2 shine with the combination of 3rd generation i7 CPU and the entry high-end level GTX660M.

 

Yeah, just google "Crysis 2 CPU scaling" and you will see that the game relies a lot on the CPU

 

That machine had a Hex core i7 heavily overclocked faster ram and in bench marks that overclocked i7 is faster then the 3610qm.

I been overclocking for over 15 years now. I burned out more extreme edition cpu's and $800 graphic cards like they are one time use camera's. When i recamend something to someone i know what the performance is. I'm not looking at paper, im not looking at synthetic bench's, im not looking at systems that were run in a benching environment ie stuff tweeked so hard its useless for gaming but scores high in benchmarks.


People can try to give glory to the 8800GT. The G192 was a good core in its time. It was very short lived. You can slap that turd in a 3rd gen i7 system and it will still get wrecked by a GTX 670m. Hell you can SLI it up to and it still going to get slapped. Playing games the 670m is much much faster and when you overclock it it just pounds the living heck out of the 8800gt even more. So unless you like carrying around spec sheets and saying well its just a little bit slower see look numbers im completely ignoring everything that makes a gpu.



And the 8800GT we tested was a EVGA Akimbo the top of the line of the 8800GT's the 512-P3-N808-AR. And i know the 8800GT fan boys will "OH wel its only got 512mb of ram vs the 2gb." Sorry you use what your card brings to the fight. You can give a 8800GT 32gig of ram and it will still get wrecked. Fermi and kepler are light years ahead of GF192 in power, efficient you name it.



"Yeah, just google "Crysis 2 CPU scaling" and you will see that the game relies a lot on the CPU "

Yeah and i think in crysis a i7-3960X clocked to 5ghz is faster then a stock clocked i7-3610qm. I mean yeah its sandy bridge e. But 2 cores 4 threads and 2ghz more power on top of 9mb more cache . Scaling shows nice numbers when your using a $800 gpu on a $300 cpu. When you use a $40 card on a $1,100 cpu it becomes less impressive.

 

You need two identical machines to compare FPS. End of discussion.
We are not giving glory to the 8800GT (LOL) and I couldn`t give a rats behind about it or any desktop GPU.