NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M vs AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M and AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 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 965M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 18% higher core clock speed: 944 MHz vs 800 MHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
- 5.1x lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 254 Watt
- Around 50% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3797 vs 2534
- 3.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 14360 vs 3977
- 4.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.903 vs 0.789
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 9 January 2015 vs 19 September 2011 |
Core clock speed | 944 MHz vs 800 MHz |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 40 nm |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt vs 254 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3797 vs 2534 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 14360 vs 3977 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.903 vs 0.789 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2
- 3.2x more texture fill rate: 2x 38.4 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 73.6 GTexel / s
- Around 88% higher pipelines: 2x 960 vs 1024
- Around 30% better floating-point performance: 2x 1,536.0 gflops vs 2,355 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 2x 2 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 68% higher memory clock speed: 4200 MHz vs 2500 MHz
- Around 11% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 373 vs 337
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 2x 38.4 GTexel / s billion / sec vs 73.6 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 2x 960 vs 1024 |
Floating-point performance | 2x 1,536.0 gflops vs 2,355 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 2x 2 GB vs 2 GB |
Memory clock speed | 4200 MHz vs 2500 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 373 vs 337 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M | AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3797 | 2534 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 337 | 373 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 14360 | 3977 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.59 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 720.592 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.903 | 0.789 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 57.947 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 223.296 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5783 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2566 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5783 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2566 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1831 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M | AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | TeraScale 2 |
Code name | GM204 | Barts |
Launch date | 9 January 2015 | 19 September 2011 |
Place in performance rating | 721 | 723 |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 950 MHz | |
Core clock speed | 944 MHz | 800 MHz |
CUDA cores | 1024 | |
Floating-point performance | 2,355 gflops | 2x 1,536.0 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
Pipelines | 1024 | 2x 960 |
Texture fill rate | 73.6 GTexel / s | 2x 38.4 GTexel / s billion / sec |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 254 Watt |
Transistor count | 5,200 million | 1,700 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | 1 | |
G-SYNC support | ||
HDMI | ||
VGA аnalog display support | 1 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
Laptop size | large | |
SLI options | 1 | |
Supplementary power connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 11.2 (11_0) |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2x 2 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 80 GB / s | 2x 134.4 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 2x 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 2500 MHz | 4200 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
CUDA | ||
DSR | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
SLI |