NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M pour tous les caractéristiques connus dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Infos techniques, Sorties et ports de vidéo, Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences, Soutien API, Mémoire, Technologies. Analyse du performance de référence des cartes vidéo: 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.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 9 mois plus tard
- Environ 67% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 45 Watt versus 75 Watt
- Environ 25% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 2521 versus 2014
- Environ 35% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 9809 versus 7252
- 4.3x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 37.761 versus 8.832
- 2.6x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.428 versus 0.935
- Environ 95% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 38.889 versus 19.952
- 3.5x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 151.016 versus 43.535
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 3817 versus 3188
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3685 versus 3275
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3353 versus 3333
- Environ 20% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 3817 versus 3188
- Environ 13% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3685 versus 3275
- Environ 1% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3353 versus 3333
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 979 versus 759
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 12 March 2014 versus 30 May 2013 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt versus 75 Watt |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2521 versus 2014 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9809 versus 7252 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 37.761 versus 8.832 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.428 versus 0.935 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.889 versus 19.952 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.016 versus 43.535 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3817 versus 3188 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3685 versus 3275 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 versus 3333 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3817 versus 3188 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3685 versus 3275 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 versus 3333 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 979 versus 759 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M
- Environ 53% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 55.23 GTexel / s versus 36.08 GTexel / s
- Environ 20% de pipelines plus haut: 768 versus 640
- Environ 15% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 1,326 gflops versus 1,155 gflops
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 291 versus 225
- Environ 34% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 520.747 versus 388.248
| Caractéristiques | |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 55.23 GTexel / s versus 36.08 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 768 versus 640 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,326 gflops versus 1,155 gflops |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 291 versus 225 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 520.747 versus 388.248 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M
| 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 |
|
|
| Nom | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 2521 | 2014 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 225 | 291 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 9809 | 7252 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 37.761 | 8.832 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 388.248 | 520.747 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.428 | 0.935 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 38.889 | 19.952 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 151.016 | 43.535 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 3817 | 3188 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3685 | 3275 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3353 | 3333 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 3817 | 3188 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3685 | 3275 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3353 | 3333 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 979 | 759 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | Kepler |
| Nom de code | GM107 | GK106 |
| Date de sortie | 12 March 2014 | 30 May 2013 |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 896 | 1005 |
| Genre | Laptop | Laptop |
Infos techniques |
||
| Noyaux CUDA | 640 | 768 |
| Performance á point flottant | 1,155 gflops | 1,326 gflops |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 768 |
| Taux de remplissage de la texture | 36.08 GTexel / s | 55.23 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 45 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Compte de transistor | 1,870 million | 2,540 million |
| Vitesse augmenté | 863 MHz | |
| Vitesse du noyau | 850 MHz | |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
| Audio HD reseau 7.1 sur HDMI | ||
| Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | No outputs |
| Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | Up to 3840x2160 | Up to 3840x2160 |
| Soutien du signal sDP 1.2 | Up to 3840x2160 | Up to 3840x2160 |
| Protection du contenu HDCP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| Support du signale LVDS | Up to 1920x1200 | Up to 1920x1200 |
| Bitstreaming d’audio TrueHD et DTS-HD | ||
| Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | Up to 2048x1536 | Up to 2048x1536 |
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
| Soutien de bus | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Taille du laptop | medium sized | large |
| Options SLI | 1 | |
Soutien API |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12 API |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Mémoire |
||
| RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Bande passante de la mémoire | 80.0 GB / s | 64.0 GB / s |
| Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Genre de mémoire | DDR3, GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
| Configuration standard de la mémoire | DDR3 or GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Vitesse de mémoire | 2000 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Blu-Ray | ||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Ansel | ||
| BatteryBoost | ||
| CUDA | ||
| Direct Compute | ||
| FXAA | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| Optimus | ||
| SLI | ||
| TXAA | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| 3D Vision / 3DTV Play | ||
| Blu-Ray 3D Support | ||
| Verde Drivers | ||
Navigation
Choisir un GPU
Comparer les cartes vidéo
Comparer NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M avec des autres
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 850M vs
NVIDIAGeForce 7800 GS AGP
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 850M vs
ATIRadeon HD 3300 IGP
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 850M vs
ATIMobility Radeon HD 3870 X2
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 850M vs
NVIDIAGeForce 810A
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 850M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950A
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 850M vs
AMDRadeon R9 M375X
