NVIDIA GeForce MX110 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce MX110 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M 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, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 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), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce MX110
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- Around 6% higher core clock speed: 965 MHz vs 914 MHz
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 75 Watt
- 2x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1000 or 2500 MHz
Launch date | 17 November 2017 vs 13 March 2015 |
Core clock speed | 965 MHz vs 914 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt vs 75 Watt |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 1000 or 2500 MHz |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
- Around 13% higher boost clock speed: 1124 MHz vs 993 MHz
- Around 89% higher texture fill rate: 44.96 GTexel / s vs 23.83 GTexel / s
- 2.5x more pipelines: 640 vs 256
- Around 89% better floating-point performance: 1,439 gflops vs 762.6 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 82% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2577 vs 1417
- Around 15% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 217 vs 189
- 2.3x better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9744 vs 4256
- Around 89% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4148 vs 2197
- Around 89% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4148 vs 2197
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 3502
- Around 6% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 3502
Specifications (specs) | |
Boost clock speed | 1124 MHz vs 993 MHz |
Texture fill rate | 44.96 GTexel / s vs 23.83 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 640 vs 256 |
Floating-point performance | 1,439 gflops vs 762.6 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 2577 vs 1417 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 217 vs 189 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 9744 vs 4256 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 4148 vs 2197 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 4148 vs 2197 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3715 vs 3502 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3715 vs 3502 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3352 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3352 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX110
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce MX110 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 1417 | 2577 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 189 | 217 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 4256 | 9744 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2197 | 4148 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2197 | 4148 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3502 | 3715 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3502 | 3715 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3352 | 3358 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3352 | 3358 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 42.396 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 373.644 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.54 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 39.412 | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 139.158 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 3350 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce MX110 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell |
Code name | GM108 | GM107 |
Launch date | 17 November 2017 | 13 March 2015 |
Place in performance rating | 891 | 797 |
Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 993 MHz | 1124 MHz |
Core clock speed | 965 MHz | 914 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 762.6 gflops | 1,439 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 256 | 640 |
Texture fill rate | 23.83 GTexel / s | 44.96 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | 75 Watt |
CUDA cores | 640 | |
Transistor count | 1,870 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | 1 | |
HDMI | ||
VGA аnalog display support | 1 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 40.1 GB / s | 32 or 80 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 1000 or 2500 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 / DDR3 | DDR3 or GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
CUDA | ||
GameWorks | ||
Optimus | ||
Verde Drivers | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
DSR | ||
GameStream | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
SLI |