NVIDIA Quadro M1000M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA Quadro M1000M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost 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 Quadro M1000M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 4 month(s) later
• Around 1% higher core clock speed: 993 MHz vs 980 MHz
• Around 4% higher boost clock speed: 1072 MHz vs 1033 MHz
• 3.4x lower typical power consumption: 40 Watt vs 134 Watt
• 835.3x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 6.0 GB/s
• Around 52% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 38.33 vs 25.21
• Around 28% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 721.18 vs 561.43
• Around 51% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.056 vs 2.026
• Around 39% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 42.938 vs 30.868
• 2.7x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 137.786 vs 51.009
• Around 22% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4196 vs 3426
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3716 vs 3642
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3242
• Around 22% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4196 vs 3426
• Around 2% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3716 vs 3642
• Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3242

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

• Around 97% higher texture fill rate: 62.7 billion / sec vs 31.78 GTexel / s
• Around 50% higher pipelines: 768 vs 512
• Around 56% better floating-point performance: 1,585 gflops vs 1,017 gflops
• 1024x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 2 GB / 4 GB
• Around 18% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3357 vs 2844
• Around 49% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 460 vs 308
• Around 8% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9566 vs 8849
• Around 10% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1106 vs 1002

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2844 3357
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	308 460
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	8849 9566
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	38.33 25.21
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	721.18 561.43
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3.056 2.026
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	42.938 30.868
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	137.786 51.009
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4196 3426
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3716 3642
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3242
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4196 3426
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3716 3642
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3242
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	1002 1106

Compare specifications (specs)