NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M 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 960
- Videocard is newer: launch date 10 month(s) later
- 2x more texture fill rate: 72 billion / sec vs 36.08 GTexel / s
- Around 60% higher pipelines: 1024 vs 640
- 2.1x better floating-point performance: 2,413 gflops vs 1,155 gflops
- 2.4x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 6111 vs 2521
- 3x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 673 vs 225
- Around 91% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 18734 vs 9809
- Around 95% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 73.733 vs 37.761
- 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 792.44 vs 388.248
- 2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 4.888 vs 2.428
- Around 33% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 200.825 vs 151.016
- Around 89% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 7218 vs 3817
- Around 89% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 7218 vs 3817
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 22 January 2015 vs 12 March 2014 |
Texture fill rate | 72 billion / sec vs 36.08 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1024 vs 640 |
Floating-point performance | 2,413 gflops vs 1,155 gflops |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6111 vs 2521 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 vs 225 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 18734 vs 9809 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 73.733 vs 37.761 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 792.44 vs 388.248 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.888 vs 2.428 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 200.825 vs 151.016 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7218 vs 3817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 vs 3685 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7218 vs 3817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 vs 3685 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
- 2.7x lower typical power consumption: 45 Watt vs 120 Watt
- Around 10% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 38.889 vs 35.338
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 vs 3335
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 vs 3335
- 6x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 979 vs 162
Specifications (specs) | |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt vs 120 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.889 vs 35.338 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 vs 3335 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 vs 3335 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 979 vs 162 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
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 |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 6111 | 2521 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 673 | 225 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 18734 | 9809 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 73.733 | 37.761 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 792.44 | 388.248 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.888 | 2.428 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 35.338 | 38.889 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 200.825 | 151.016 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 7218 | 3817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3691 | 3685 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3335 | 3353 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 7218 | 3817 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3691 | 3685 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3335 | 3353 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 162 | 979 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell |
Code name | GM206 | GM107 |
Launch date | 22 January 2015 | 12 March 2014 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | |
Place in performance rating | 514 | 896 |
Price now | $229.99 | |
Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Value for money (0-100) | 34.63 | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1178 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 1127 MHz | |
CUDA cores | 1024 | 640 |
Floating-point performance | 2,413 gflops | 1,155 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 1024 | 640 |
Texture fill rate | 72 billion / sec | 36.08 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 120 Watt | 45 Watt |
Transistor count | 2,940 million | 1,870 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
Display Connectors | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2, 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort | No outputs |
HDCP | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | ||
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
eDP 1.2 signal support | Up to 3840x2160 | |
HDCP content protection | ||
HDMI | ||
LVDS signal support | Up to 1920x1200 | |
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | ||
VGA аnalog display support | Up to 2048x1536 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 400 Watt | |
SLI options | 2x | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pins | |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.5 |
Vulkan | ||
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 112 GB / s | 80.0 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 7.0 GB/s | |
Memory type | GDDR5 | DDR3, GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Standard memory configuration | DDR3 or GDDR5 | |
Technologies |
||
CUDA | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
3D Blu-Ray | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
Direct Compute | ||
FXAA | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
SLI | ||
TXAA |