NVIDIA GeForce 920MX vs NVIDIA GeForce 845M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce 920MX and NVIDIA GeForce 845M 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 - 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, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 920MX
- Videocard is newer: launch date 6 month(s) later
- Around 2% higher texture fill rate: 28.22 GTexel / s vs 27.62 GTexel / s
- 2.1x lower typical power consumption: 16 Watt vs 33 Watt
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3691 vs 3287
- Around 12% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3691 vs 3287
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 25 March 2016 vs 26 August 2015 |
Texture fill rate | 28.22 GTexel / s vs 27.62 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 16 Watt vs 33 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 vs 3287 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 vs 3287 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 845M
- Around 11% higher core clock speed: 1071 MHz vs 965 MHz
- Around 18% higher boost clock speed: 1176 MHz vs 993 MHz
- Around 50% higher pipelines: 384 vs 256
- Around 47% better floating-point performance: 883.7 gflops vs 602.1 gflops
- 2.8x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1800 MHz
- Around 41% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1524 vs 1081
- Around 42% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 213 vs 150
- Around 55% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6112 vs 3944
- Around 32% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2320 vs 1764
- Around 32% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2320 vs 1764
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1071 MHz vs 965 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1176 MHz vs 993 MHz |
Pipelines | 384 vs 256 |
Floating-point performance | 883.7 gflops vs 602.1 gflops |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 1800 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1524 vs 1081 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 213 vs 150 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 6112 vs 3944 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2320 vs 1764 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2320 vs 1764 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce 920MX
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 845M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce 920MX | NVIDIA GeForce 845M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1081 | 1524 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 150 | 213 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 3944 | 6112 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1764 | 2320 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 | 3287 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1764 | 2320 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 | 3287 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3358 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 385 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.295 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 22.387 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 76.073 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce 920MX | NVIDIA GeForce 845M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell |
Code name | GM108 | GM108 |
Launch date | 25 March 2016 | 26 August 2015 |
Place in performance rating | 1040 | 1042 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 993 MHz | 1176 MHz |
Core clock speed | 965 MHz | 1071 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 602.1 gflops | 883.7 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 256 | 384 |
Texture fill rate | 28.22 GTexel / s | 27.62 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 16 Watt | 33 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,870 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB / s | 16.02 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 64 / 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1800 MHz | 5012 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3, GDDR5 | DDR3 / GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
GPU Boost | ||
Optimus | ||
Verde Drivers | ||
GeForce Experience |