NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M 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 950M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• Around 8% higher core clock speed: 914 MHz vs 850 MHz
• Around 30% higher boost clock speed: 1124 MHz vs 863 MHz
• Around 9% better floating-point performance: 1,439 gflops vs 1,326 gflops
• 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Around 25% higher memory clock speed: 1000 or 2500 MHz vs 2000 MHz
• Around 28% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2577 vs 2014
• Around 34% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9744 vs 7252
• 4.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 42.396 vs 8.832
• 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.54 vs 0.935
• Around 98% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 39.412 vs 19.952
• 3.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.158 vs 43.535
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4148 vs 3188
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 3275
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3333
• Around 30% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4148 vs 3188
• Around 13% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 3275
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3333
• 4.4x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3350 vs 759

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M

• Around 23% higher texture fill rate: 55.23 GTexel / s vs 44.96 GTexel / s
• Around 20% higher pipelines: 768 vs 640
• Around 34% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 291 vs 217
• Around 39% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 520.747 vs 373.644

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2577 2014
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	217 291
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	9744 7252
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	42.396 8.832
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	373.644 520.747
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.54 0.935
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	39.412 19.952
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	139.158 43.535
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4148 3188
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3275
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3333
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4148 3188
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3275
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3333
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	3350 759

Compare specifications (specs)