GeForce Go 7700 vs Radeon R5 220

NVIDIA

GeForce Go 7700

2013Core: 1046 MHzBoost: 1085 MHz
Similar parts
·······
VS
AMD

Radeon R5 220

2013Core: 947 MHz
Similar parts
·······

GeForce Go 7700 vs Radeon R5 220 Performance Spectrum

About G3D Mark

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

GeForce Go 7700 vs Radeon R5 220 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce Go 7700 vs Radeon R5 220: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce Go 7700

2013

Why buy it

  • Draws 230W instead of 275W, a 45W reduction.

Trade-offs

  • Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 1 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
  • 2013 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
  • Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 4.2 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $35 MSRP).

Radeon R5 220

2013

Why buy it

  • Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 4.2 vs 0 G3D/$ ($35 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
  • 100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (1 GB vs 512 MB).
  • More future proof: GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

  • 2013 hardware with 1 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
  • 19.6% higher power demand at 275W vs 230W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?
GeForce Go 7700 is the faster gaming card right now based on the synthetic data we have. It leads by 0.7% in PassMark G3D (148 vs 147), which is the best performance signal available in this matchup.
Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?
GeForce Go 7700 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond because it comes out ahead on the available hardware-headroom signals for this matchup.
Which GPU is the better buy today?
Radeon R5 220 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup. If you are mainly targeting 1080p and some 1440p, Radeon R5 220 is the easier value choice. If you care more about 1080p and some 1440p headroom, GeForce Go 7700 has the stronger long-term case.

GeForce Go 7700 vs Radeon R5 220 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

NVIDIA

GeForce Go 7700

The GeForce Go 7700 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in May 30 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 1046 MHz to 1085 MHz. It has 1536 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 230W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 148 points. Launch price was $399.

AMD

Radeon R5 220

The Radeon R5 220 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 5 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 947 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 147 points. Launch price was $399.

Graphics Performance

The GeForce Go 7700 scores 148 and the Radeon R5 220 reaches 147 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce Go 7700 is built on Kepler while the Radeon R5 220 uses GCN 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 1,536 (GeForce Go 7700) vs 2,560 (Radeon R5 220). Raw compute: 3.333 TFLOPS (GeForce Go 7700) vs 4.849 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 220).

FeatureGeForce Go 7700Radeon R5 220
G3D Mark Score
148
147
Architecture
Kepler
GCN 2.0
Process Node
28 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
1536
2560+67%
Compute (TFLOPS)
3.333 TFLOPS
4.849 TFLOPS+45%
ROPs
32
64+100%
TMUs
128
160+25%
L1 Cache
128 KB
640 KB+400%
L2 Cache
0.5 MB
1 MB+100%

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce Go 7700 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R5 220 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

FeatureGeForce Go 7700Radeon R5 220
Upscaling Tech
Upscaling support
FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation
Not Supported
Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
NVIDIA Reflex
AMD Anti-Lag
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce Go 7700 has 512 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon R5 220 carries 1 GB. Radeon R5 220 gives you 100% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce Go 7700 and 128-bit on the Radeon R5 220. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GeForce Go 7700) vs 1 MB (Radeon R5 220) — the Radeon R5 220 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureGeForce Go 7700Radeon R5 220
VRAM Capacity
0.5 GB
1 GB+100%
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth
Unknown
Unknown
Bus Width
128-bit
128-bit
L2 Cache
0.5 MB
1 MB+100%
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 9.0c (GeForce Go 7700) vs 11.2 (Radeon R5 220). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 3.

FeatureGeForce Go 7700Radeon R5 220
DirectX
9.0c
11.2+24%
Max Displays
2
3+50%
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: No (GeForce Go 7700) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon R5 220). Decoder: PureVideo vs UVD 3.1.

FeatureGeForce Go 7700Radeon R5 220
Encoder
No
VCE 1.0
Decoder
PureVideo
UVD 3.1
Codecs
MPEG-2,WMV9,H.264
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce Go 7700 draws 230W versus the Radeon R5 220's 275W — a 17.8% difference. The GeForce Go 7700 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce Go 7700) vs 350W (Radeon R5 220). Power connectors: Legacy vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 168mm, occupying 0 vs 1 slots.

FeatureGeForce Go 7700Radeon R5 220
TDP
230W-16%
275W
Recommended PSU
350W
350W
Power Connector
Legacy
PCIe-powered
Length
0mm
168mm
Height
0mm
Slots
0-100%
1
Temp (Load)
85°C
Perf/Watt
0.6+20%
0.5