Radeon HD 8670D IGP vs GeForce GTX 295
Summary
Reasons to consider Radeon HD 8670D IGP |
| 189 watts lower power draw. This might be a strong point if your current power supply is not enough to handle the GeForce GTX 295 . |
| This is a much newer product, it might have better long term support. |
| Based on an outdated architecture (ATI TeraScale), there are no performance optimizations for current games and applications |
Reasons to consider GeForce GTX 295 |
| Based on an outdated architecture (Nvidia Tesla), there are no performance optimizations for current games and applications |
| PhysX support, however PhysX performance on newest games may be poor |
No clear winner declared
We have no data to declare a winner at this time.
Core Configuration
| Radeon HD 8670D IGP | | GeForce GTX 295 | |
|---|
| GPU Name | Devastator () | vs | GT200B (G200-400-B3) |
| Fab Process | 32 nm | vs | 55 nm |
| Die Size | 246 mm² | vs | 470 mm² |
| Transistors | 1,303 million | vs | 1,400 million |
| Shaders | 384 | vs | 240 |
| Compute Units | 6 | vs | 10 |
| Core clock | 844 MHz | vs | 576 MHz |
| ROPs | 8 | vs | 28 |
| TMUs | 24 | vs | 80 |
Memory Configuration
| Radeon HD 8670D IGP | | GeForce GTX 295 | |
|---|
| Memory Type | System Shared | vs | GDDR3 |
| Bus Width | System Shared | vs | 448 bit x2 |
| Memory Speed | System Shared | vs | 999 MHz
1998 MHz effective |
| Memory Size | 0 Mb | vs | 896 Mb |
Additional details
| Radeon HD 8670D IGP | | GeForce GTX 295 | |
|---|
| TDP | 100 watts | vs | 289 watts |
| Release Date | 12 Mar 2013 | vs | 8 Jan 2009 |
Radeon HD 8670D IGP
6.75 GP/s
GeForce GTX 295
32.20 GP/s
GigaPixels - higher is better
Radeon HD 8670D IGP
20.30 GT/s
GeForce GTX 295
92.20 GT/s
GigaTexels - higher is better
Radeon HD 8670D IGP
0.00 GB/s
GeForce GTX 295
224.00 GB/s
GB/s - higher is better
Radeon HD 8670D IGP
648.20 GFLOPs
GeForce GTX 295
1192.40 GFLOPs
GFLOPs - higher is better