NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M 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 850M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 9 month(s) later
• Around 67% lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 75 Watt
• Around 25% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2521 vs 2014
• Around 35% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9809 vs 7252
• 4.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 37.761 vs 8.832
• 2.6x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.428 vs 0.935
• Around 95% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 38.889 vs 19.952
• 3.5x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 151.016 vs 43.535
• Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3817 vs 3188
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3685 vs 3275
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 3333
• Around 20% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3817 vs 3188
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3685 vs 3275
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 3333
• Around 29% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 979 vs 759

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M

• Around 53% higher texture fill rate: 55.23 GTexel / s vs 36.08 GTexel / s
• Around 20% higher pipelines: 768 vs 640
• Around 15% better floating-point performance: 1,326 gflops vs 1,155 gflops
• Around 29% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 291 vs 225
• Around 34% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 520.747 vs 388.248

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2521 2014
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	225 291
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	9809 7252
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	37.761 8.832
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	388.248 520.747
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.428 0.935
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	38.889 19.952
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	151.016 43.535
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3817 3188
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3685 3275
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3353 3333
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3817 3188
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3685 3275
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3353 3333
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	979 759

Compare specifications (specs)