NVIDIA GeForce 820A vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 820A and NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 820A
- Videocard is newer: launch date 11 month(s) later
- 3x lower typical power consumption: 15 Watt vs 45 Watt
Launch date | 17 March 2014 vs 1 April 2013 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt vs 45 Watt |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M
- Around 8% higher core clock speed: 837 MHz vs 775 MHz
- 2.2x more texture fill rate: 26.78 GTexel / s vs 12.4 GTexel / s
- 4x more pipelines: 384 vs 96
- 2.2x better floating-point performance: 642.8 gflops vs 297.6 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
- Around 97% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1093 vs 556
- Around 13% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 179 vs 158
- Around 13% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 3439 vs 3032
- Around 83% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3133 vs 1716
- Around 83% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3133 vs 1716
- Around 97% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3352 vs 1705
- Around 97% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3352 vs 1705
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 837 MHz vs 775 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 26.78 GTexel / s vs 12.4 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 384 vs 96 |
Floating-point performance | 642.8 gflops vs 297.6 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 1 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1093 vs 556 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 179 vs 158 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3439 vs 3032 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3133 vs 1716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3133 vs 1716 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 vs 1705 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 vs 1705 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 820A
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce 820A | NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 556 | 1093 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 158 | 179 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3032 | 3439 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1716 | 3133 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1716 | 3133 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1705 | 3352 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1705 | 3352 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 10.489 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 202.905 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.66 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 8.184 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 19.323 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2255 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2255 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce 820A | NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Fermi 2.0 | Kepler |
Code name | GF117 | GK107 |
Launch date | 17 March 2014 | 1 April 2013 |
Place in performance rating | 1285 | 1287 |
Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Core clock speed | 775 MHz | 837 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 297.6 gflops | 642.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 96 | 384 |
Texture fill rate | 12.4 GTexel / s | 26.78 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt | 45 Watt |
Transistor count | 585 million | 1,270 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | ||
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
HDCP content protection | ||
HDMI | ||
LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | |
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | ||
VGA аnalog display support | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | 28.8 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 1800 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3 | DDR3, GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Standard memory configuration | DDR3 / GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
CUDA | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus |