Laptop Graphics 8670M Benchmarks

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
$hawn

$hawn

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2009
854
1
19,060
Hi,

Does anyone happen to know of any article that has benchmarks of the Radeon HD 8670M vs the older HD 7670M?
I'm a bit curious, although the 8670M has GCN cores, vs the VLIW5 ones on the older card, it has much less cores and the memory bandwidth has been almost halved!! Is this new GPU chip really better than the 7670M it was meant to replace?

Benchmarks against a Geforce 630M/635M/640M/740M would also be really helpful.

Thanks!
 
Solution
Wisecracker
@wisecracker No dude, its 64bit DDR3 :(
Click to expand...

I think that's where part of the 'arch' thing comes into play, even if it has less memory bandwidth.

Even though the 'Mars' is 64-bit DDR3 I suspect the GCN arch is simply much more efficient than the old VLIW5 of the Redwood arch -- even if it's GDDR5 -- in both performance and power efficiency.

And regretfully, NotebookCheck is really the best that's out there for what they try to do, but you have to look at it as a starting point and not a definitive source.

It's not like Tom's -- we're 'The Authority' :na:



Sort by date Sort by votes
Wisecracker

Wisecracker

Splendid
Jan 15, 2007
8,106
17
31,965
NotebookCheck has been a real bummer for me as of late with screwed-up specs and wacky benchies - that said ...

There is not a great deal of difference between most of those varieties, and you have to carefully validate the individual specs of each model.

I would say the GCN cores would be 5-10% faster than the 'old' Redwood-based card (it's really a 2-generation leap) BUT when comparing the nVidia chips the specs really come into play.

The deal is ... the differences in architecture, how the OEM configures the card, the extra features, and even the games themselves (some favor Radeons - some nVidia / some work great in AMD dual-graphics - some work worse in dual-graphics)

Then you have to deal with the memory of each model ... 64-bit GDDR5 has the same bandwidth as 128-bit DDR3, it can swing from generation to generation, and OEMs are really crappy about identifying the exact specs (and NotebookCheck can screw 'em up on top of that).

So. Good luck! :)


 
Upvote 0 Downvote
$hawn

$hawn

Distinguished
Oct 28, 2009
854
1
19,060
@rolli59 Dude, sites like NotebookCheck are a waste of time. You can look at those theoretical pixel rate/texture rate and what not, but you'll never know how the cards perform in real games cause the architectures are different.

I wanted real life game benchmarks if anyone could find them. the closest I managed to find was this,
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-hd-8790m-mars-benchmark,3382.html

@wisecracker No dude, its 64bit DDR3 :(
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
rolli59

rolli59

Titan
Oct 27, 2007
47,790
283
130,890


It may be a waste of time for you but for most it is indication, most gamers use desktops so very little info on the web comparing mobile GPU's to each other. You are more likely to find comparison between different laptops since you can not just sit there and swap mobile GPU's into the same laptop to benchmark them like you can do with desktop cards.!
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Wisecracker

Wisecracker

Splendid
Jan 15, 2007
8,106
17
31,965
@wisecracker No dude, its 64bit DDR3 :(
Click to expand...

I think that's where part of the 'arch' thing comes into play, even if it has less memory bandwidth.

Even though the 'Mars' is 64-bit DDR3 I suspect the GCN arch is simply much more efficient than the old VLIW5 of the Redwood arch -- even if it's GDDR5 -- in both performance and power efficiency.

And regretfully, NotebookCheck is really the best that's out there for what they try to do, but you have to look at it as a starting point and not a definitive source.

It's not like Tom's -- we're 'The Authority' :na:



 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Solution
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom