NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M vs ATI FirePro V8800

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M and ATI FirePro V8800 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 4 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• Around 14% higher core clock speed: 944 MHz vs 825 MHz
• Around 12% higher texture fill rate: 73.6 GTexel / s vs 66.0 GTexel / s
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 4.2x lower typical power consumption: 50 Watt vs 208 Watt
• Around 66% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3797 vs 2281
• 3.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 67.59 vs 18.27
• 10.9x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.903 vs 0.357
• Around 17% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 57.947 vs 49.357

Reasons to consider the ATI FirePro V8800

• Around 56% higher pipelines: 1600 vs 1024
• Around 12% better floating-point performance: 2,640.0 gflops vs 2,355 gflops
• Around 84% higher memory clock speed: 4600 MHz vs 2500 MHz
• Around 32% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 445 vs 337
• 2.6x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 36751 vs 14360
• Around 64% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1180.667 vs 720.592
• Around 2% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 228.843 vs 223.296
• Around 39% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3575 vs 2566
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 vs 3337
• Around 39% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3575 vs 2566
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 vs 3337

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
GPU 2: ATI FirePro V8800

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	3797 2281
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	337 445
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	14360 36751
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	67.59 18.27
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	720.592 1180.667
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.903 0.357
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	57.947 49.357
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	223.296 228.843
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2566 3575
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3337 3356
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2566 3575
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3337 3356

Compare specifications (specs)