NVIDIA GeForce 820M vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 435M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 820M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 435M 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, 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 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.

 

Differences

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 820M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 2 month(s) later
• Around 28% higher texture fill rate: 10 GTexel / s vs 7.8 billion / sec
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 2.3x more memory clock speed: 1802 MHz vs 800 MHz
• Around 39% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 2789 vs 2012
• Around 83% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 7.765 vs 4.25
• Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1195 vs 929
• Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1447 vs 1210
• 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3349 vs 1524
• Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1195 vs 929
• Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1447 vs 1210
• 2.2x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3349 vs 1524

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 435M

• Around 60% higher core clock speed: 1300 MHz vs 810 MHz
• Around 4% better floating-point performance: 249.6 gflops vs 240.0 gflops
• Around 29% lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 45 Watt
• 2x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 9% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 536 vs 490
• Around 54% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 176 vs 114

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 820M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 435M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	490 536
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	114 176
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	2789 2012
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	7.765 4.25
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1195 929
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1447 1210
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3349 1524
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1195 929
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1447 1210
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3349 1524

Compare specifications (specs)