NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M vs NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M and NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M 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 950M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 4 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- 4.2x more texture fill rate: 44.96 GTexel / s vs 10.6 billion / sec
- 4.4x more pipelines: 640 vs 144
- 4.2x better floating-point performance: 1,439 gflops vs 339.8 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 3 GB
- 2x more memory clock speed: 1000 or 2500 MHz vs 1250 MHz
- 3.2x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2581 vs 811
- Around 7% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 217 vs 203
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 3274
- Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 3274
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 13 March 2015 vs 3 September 2010 |
Texture fill rate | 44.96 GTexel / s vs 10.6 billion / sec |
Pipelines | 640 vs 144 |
Floating-point performance | 1,439 gflops vs 339.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 3 GB |
Memory clock speed | 1000 or 2500 MHz vs 1250 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2581 vs 811 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 217 vs 203 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3350 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3350 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
- Around 29% higher core clock speed: 1180 MHz vs 914 MHz
- 2.1x lower typical power consumption: 35 Watt vs 75 Watt
- Around 27% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 12379 vs 9740
Specifications (specs) | |
Core clock speed | 1180 MHz vs 914 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt vs 75 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 12379 vs 9740 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2581 | 811 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 217 | 203 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9740 | 12379 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 42.396 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 373.644 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.54 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 39.412 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 139.158 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4148 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 | 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3350 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4148 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 | 3274 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3350 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3350 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M | NVIDIA GeForce GT 445M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | Fermi |
Code name | GM107 | GF106 |
Launch date | 13 March 2015 | 3 September 2010 |
Place in performance rating | 878 | 880 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1124 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 914 MHz | 1180 MHz |
CUDA cores | 640 | 144 |
Floating-point performance | 1,439 gflops | 339.8 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 640 | 144 |
Texture fill rate | 44.96 GTexel / s | 10.6 billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 35 Watt |
Transistor count | 1,870 million | 1,170 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | 1 | |
HDMI | ||
VGA аnalog display support | 1 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Laptop size | medium sized | large |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 3 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 32 or 80 GB / s | 60.0 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 192 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 1000 or 2500 MHz | 1250 MHz |
Memory type | DDR3 or GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
Adaptive VSync | ||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
CUDA | ||
DSR | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
SLI | ||
3D Vision | ||
DirectCompute | ||
DirectX 11 | DirectX 11 |