NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) vs NVIDIA GeForce 920M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook) and NVIDIA GeForce 920M 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 GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 10 month(s) later
• Around 56% higher core clock speed: 1493 MHz vs 954 MHz
• 6.3x more texture fill rate: 77.76 GTexel / s vs 12.4 GTexel / s
• 2x more pipelines: 768 vs 384
• 8.4x better floating-point performance: 2,488 gflops vs 297.6 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 16 nm vs 28 nm
• 3.9x more memory clock speed: 7008 MHz vs 1800 MHz
• 8.3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5918 vs 716
• 2.7x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 323 vs 119
• 5.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 20732 vs 3722
• 9.1x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 75.758 vs 8.358
• 5.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 843.503 vs 157.606
• 6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.071 vs 0.843
• Around 61% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 24.676 vs 15.374
• 7.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 301.168 vs 40.443
• 5.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 8496 vs 1598
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3687 vs 3636
• 5.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 8496 vs 1598
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3687 vs 3636
• 7.2x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 2340 vs 326

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 920M

• 2.3x lower typical power consumption: 33 Watt vs 75 Watt
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3336
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3336

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti (Notebook)
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 920M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	5918 716
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	323 119
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	20732 3722
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	75.758 8.358
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	843.503 157.606
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5.071 0.843
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	24.676 15.374
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	301.168 40.443
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8496 1598
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3687 3636
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3336 3358
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	8496 1598
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3687 3636
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3336 3358
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	2340 326

Compare specifications (specs)