NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M vs ATI Radeon E4690
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M and ATI Radeon E4690 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 5 year(s) 7 month(s) later
- Around 57% higher core clock speed: 944 MHz vs 600 MHz
- 3.8x more texture fill rate: 73.6 GTexel / s vs 19.2 GTexel / s
- 3.2x more pipelines: 1024 vs 320
- 6.1x better floating-point performance: 2,355 gflops vs 384.0 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 55 nm
- 4x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 512 MB
- Around 79% higher memory clock speed: 2500 MHz vs 1400 MHz
- 9.3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3775 vs 405
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3337 vs 3302
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3337 vs 3302
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 9 January 2015 vs 1 June 2009 |
| Core clock speed | 944 MHz vs 600 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 73.6 GTexel / s vs 19.2 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1024 vs 320 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,355 gflops vs 384.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 55 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 512 MB |
| Memory clock speed | 2500 MHz vs 1400 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3775 vs 405 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 vs 3302 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 vs 3302 |
Reasons to consider the ATI Radeon E4690
- Around 67% lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 50 Watt
- Around 2% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 347 vs 340
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt vs 50 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 347 vs 340 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
GPU 2: ATI Radeon E4690
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M | ATI Radeon E4690 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3775 | 405 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 340 | 347 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 14701 | |
| 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 | |
| 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 | 3302 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5783 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2566 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 | 3302 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1831 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M | ATI Radeon E4690 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | TeraScale |
| Code name | GM204 | RV730 |
| Launch date | 9 January 2015 | 1 June 2009 |
| Place in performance rating | 702 | 715 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 950 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 944 MHz | 600 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 1024 | |
| Floating-point performance | 2,355 gflops | 384.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 320 |
| Texture fill rate | 73.6 GTexel / s | 19.2 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 30 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,200 million | 514 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | |
| 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) | MXM-II |
| Laptop size | large | |
| SLI options | 1 | |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 10.1 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 3.3 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 80 GB / s | 22.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2500 MHz | 1400 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| 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 | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
NVIDIAGeForce FX 5100
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
AMDRadeon HD 8950 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
AMDRadeon HD 8550D IGP
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 750 Ti
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
NVIDIAQuadro M2000M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 965M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 1050 Max-Q
