NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M vs ATI Radeon HD 5850

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M and ATI Radeon HD 5850 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 960M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 5 month(s) later
• Around 51% higher core clock speed: 1096 MHz vs 725 MHz
• Around 62% higher boost clock speed: 1176 MHz vs 725 MHz
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 2x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 151 Watt
• 4x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 71% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3368 vs 1969
• 3.3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 54.294 vs 16.467
• 2.4x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.692 vs 1.541
• Around 23% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 51.794 vs 42.08
• Around 38% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5264 vs 3806
• Around 38% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5264 vs 3806

Reasons to consider the ATI Radeon HD 5850

• Around 11% higher texture fill rate: 52.2 GTexel / s vs 47.04 GTexel / s
• 2.3x more pipelines: 1440 vs 640
• Around 39% better floating-point performance: 2,088.0 gflops vs 1,505 gflops
• Around 60% higher memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 2500 MHz
• Around 66% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 407 vs 245
• 3.1x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 33977 vs 11003
• Around 40% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1109.612 vs 795.325

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
GPU 2: ATI Radeon HD 5850

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3368 1969
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	245 407
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	11003 33977
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	54.294 16.467
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	795.325 1109.612
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.692 1.541
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	51.794 42.08
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5264 3806
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3714 3715
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3358
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	5264 3806
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3714 3715
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3358

Compare specifications (specs)