NVIDIA
GeForce 8600 GT vs GeForce 210
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
210
Aggregate performance score
We've compared 8600 GT and 210 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗8600 GT outperforms 210 by 23% based on our aggregate benchmark results.+23%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better.GeForce 8600 GT vs GeForce 210: key takeaway
The comparison of 8600 GT and 210 shows a 23% advantage for 8600 GT in gaming performance, while 210 may still be stronger in efficiency and feature set. Use the sections below to check whether that lead comes from real FPS, specifications, efficiency, price or platform features.
SUMMARY PROFILE
Verified-metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3831
100100
100100
1343
COMPARISON RESULT
8600 GT is the best overall choice
8600 GT leads in combined game performance. 8600 GT offers the better price per frame, while the final choice depends on the required features, memory, and games.
8600 GT leads in the combined performance index
Prices are identical
CATALOG POSITION
Full ranking →Graphics card ranking
Positions 80–85of 317
COMPARISON VERDICT
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce 8600 GT
151 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
GeForce 8600 GT
100/100 · Price $79The choice is based on the price-to-performance index and launch price.
OVERALL SCORE
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
The Summary score section compares 8600 GT and 210 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
38Better
31
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
34Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
31Better
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
100
100
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
62Better
57
FULL COMPARISON
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
The Specifications section compares 8600 GT and 210 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
Device classDesktopDesktop
OpenGL3.33.3
TFLOPS0.076Better0.039
HDMI——
DisplayPort—DisplayPort
DirectX10.010.1
Vulkan——
Power consumption47 W31 WBetter
Upscaling——
Compute APIOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.2
Launch price$79$79
Shader units / cores32Better16
Memory typeGDDR3DDR3
Power connectorNoneNone
Release date20072009
ArchitectureTeslaTesla 2.0
ThicknessSingle-slotSingle-slot
Die size169 mm²57 mm²Better
Memory cacheL2 0.03 MBL2 0.03 MB
Clock speed540 MHz589 MHzBetter
Base clock540 MHz589 MHzBetter
Boost clock540 MHz589 MHzBetter
VRAM512 MB GDDR3Better1 GB DDR3
Memory frequency1,4 GHzBetter1,2 GHz
Memory bus128 bitBetter64 bit
Memory bandwidth22 GB/sBetter10 GB/s
InterfacePCIe 1x16PCIe 2x16
Power consumption47 W31 WBetter
Process node80 nm40 nmBetter
Recommended PSU200 W200 W
Length170 mm168 mmBetter
Transistor count289 millionBetter260 million
Max monitors33
Max resolution2560 × 16004096 × 2160
USB Type-CNoNo
GAME TEST BENCH
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares 8600 GT and 210 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
8600 GT210
Verified H2HCommunity VerifiedEstimatedPredicted
Black Myth: Wukong
1080p High
23 FPSEstimated 64%
18 FPSEstimated 64%
1080p Ultra
20 FPSEstimated 64%
16 FPSEstimated 64%
1440p Ultra
10 FPSEstimated 58%
8 FPSEstimated 58%
4K Ultra
5 FPSEstimated 55%
5 FPSEstimated 55%
Black Myth: Wukong8600 GT23 FPSEstimated 64%21018 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT20 FPSEstimated 64%21016 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT10 FPSEstimated 58%2108 FPSEstimated 58%8600 GT5 FPSEstimated 55%2105 FPSEstimated 55%
Call of Duty: Warzone8600 GT23 FPSEstimated 64%21018 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT20 FPSEstimated 64%21016 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT10 FPSEstimated 58%2108 FPSEstimated 58%8600 GT5 FPSEstimated 55%2105 FPSEstimated 55%
Counter-Strike 28600 GT196 FPSEstimated 72%210154 FPSEstimated 72%8600 GT137 FPSEstimated 72%210108 FPSEstimated 72%8600 GT74 FPSEstimated 66%21058 FPSEstimated 66%8600 GT27 FPSEstimated 62%21021 FPSEstimated 62%
Cyberpunk 20778600 GT126 FPSEstimated 72%210100 FPSEstimated 72%8600 GT109 FPSEstimated 72%21086 FPSEstimated 72%8600 GT54 FPSEstimated 66%21042 FPSEstimated 66%8600 GT18 FPSEstimated 62%21014 FPSEstimated 62%
Forza Horizon 58600 GT159 FPSEstimated 78%210126 FPSEstimated 78%8600 GT103 FPSEstimated 72%21081 FPSEstimated 72%8600 GT67 FPSEstimated 66%21052 FPSEstimated 66%8600 GT39 FPSEstimated 62%21031 FPSEstimated 62%
God of War Ragnarök8600 GT23 FPSEstimated 64%21018 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT20 FPSEstimated 64%21016 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT10 FPSEstimated 58%2108 FPSEstimated 58%8600 GT5 FPSEstimated 55%2105 FPSEstimated 55%
Hogwarts Legacy8600 GT103 FPSEstimated 72%21081 FPSEstimated 72%8600 GT86 FPSEstimated 72%21068 FPSEstimated 72%8600 GT48 FPSEstimated 66%21038 FPSEstimated 66%8600 GT18 FPSEstimated 62%21014 FPSEstimated 62%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 20248600 GT23 FPSEstimated 64%21018 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT20 FPSEstimated 64%21016 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT10 FPSEstimated 58%2108 FPSEstimated 58%8600 GT5 FPSEstimated 55%2105 FPSEstimated 55%
Monster Hunter Wilds8600 GT23 FPSEstimated 64%21018 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT20 FPSEstimated 64%21016 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT10 FPSEstimated 58%2108 FPSEstimated 58%8600 GT5 FPSEstimated 55%2105 FPSEstimated 55%
Starfield8600 GT23 FPSEstimated 64%21018 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT20 FPSEstimated 64%21016 FPSEstimated 64%8600 GT10 FPSEstimated 58%2108 FPSEstimated 58%8600 GT5 FPSEstimated 55%2105 FPSEstimated 55%
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
The Benchmarks section compares 8600 GT and 210 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 100383120%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 10031310%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 10031349%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 1001343107%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 1001001000%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
HEAD TO HEAD · CALCULATED INDEX
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
The Detailed comparison section compares 8600 GT and 210 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100273629%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100283625%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 10031349%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100243845%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100303515%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
The Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling section compares 8600 GT and 210 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
DirectX10.010.1
Vulkan——
OpenGL3.33.3
Upscaling——
Compute APIOpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.2
Architecture and release
The Architecture and release section compares 8600 GT and 210 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
ArchitectureTeslaTesla 2.0
Process node80 nm40 nmBetter
Release date20072009
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
The Core layout and clocks section compares 8600 GT and 210 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
Transistor count289 millionBetter260 million
Die size169 mm²57 mm²Better
Shader units / cores32Better16
Base clock540 MHz589 MHzBetter
Boost clock540 MHz589 MHzBetter
Board size, power and compatibility
The Form factor and compatibility section compares 8600 GT and 210 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
InterfacePCIe 1x16PCIe 2x16
Length170 mm168 mmBetter
ThicknessSingle-slotSingle-slot
Recommended PSU200 W200 W
Power connectorNoneNone
Display outputs and limits
The Display outputs section compares 8600 GT and 210 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
HDMI——
DisplayPort—DisplayPort
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitors33
Max resolution2560 × 16004096 × 2160
Memory and compute throughput
The VRAM capacity and bandwidth section compares 8600 GT and 210 with normalized H2H data, turning specifications, tests and value signals into practical buying context.
VRAM512 MB GDDR3Better1 GB DDR3
Memory typeGDDR3DDR3
Memory bus128 bitBetter64 bit
TFLOPS0.076Better0.039
HEAD TO HEAD · DISCOVER
6Other comparisons
Arc A310Intel
Navi II 2CU 7xxx/9xxxAMDReviews and questions
AI EXPLAIN · HEAD TO HEAD
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
REAL CONFIGURATIONS
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
♢Moderator reviewed☆Helpful to the community🏅Expert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: 8600 GT or 210?+
8600 GT has the higher overall gaming score, while 8600 GT offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
8600 GT is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
8600 GT is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
8600 GT offers more overall performance, while 8600 GT offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
8600 GT is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
8600 GT is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
8600 GT leads in combined 1440p performance. 8600 GT can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
8600 GT is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
210 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
210 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to 8600 GT if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.