NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M 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 670M

• Around 33% lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 100 Watt
• Around 2% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 6497 vs 6362
• Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 35.916 vs 33.983
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 2731 vs 2649
• Around 3% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 2731 vs 2649

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M

• Around 4% higher core clock speed: 620 MHz vs 598 MHz
• Around 19% higher texture fill rate: 39.7 billion / sec vs 33.5 billion / sec
• Around 14% higher pipelines: 384 vs 336
• Around 18% better floating-point performance: 952.3 gflops vs 803.7 gflops
• Around 34% higher maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 1526 MB
• Around 10% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 1925 vs 1745
• Around 2% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 312 vs 307
• Around 47% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 22.12 vs 15.053
• Around 13% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 664.78 vs 588.645
• Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.003 vs 1.72
• Around 12% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 59.007 vs 52.899
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3690 vs 3627
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3690 vs 3627

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	1745 1925
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	307 312
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	6497 6362
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	15.053 22.12
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	588.645 664.78
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	1.72 2.003
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	35.916 33.983
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	52.899 59.007
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2731 2649
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3627 3690
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3346 3347
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2731 2649
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3627 3690
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3346 3347

Compare specifications (specs)