NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M versus NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti
Comparaison des cartes vidéo NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti 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 965M
- La carte vidéo est plus nouvelle: date de sortie 10 mois plus tard
- Environ 70% taux plus haut de remplissage de la texture: 73.6 GTexel / s versus 43.4 GTexel / s
- Environ 60% de pipelines plus haut: 1024 versus 640
- Environ 70% de meilleur performance á point flottant: 2,355 gflops versus 1,389 gflops
- Environ 20% consummation d’énergie moyen plus bas: 50 Watt versus 60 Watt
- 500x plus de vitesse de mémoire: 2500 MHz versus 5.4 GB/s
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en Geekbench - OpenCL: 14551 versus 11329
- Environ 59% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 67.59 versus 42.463
- Environ 12% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 720.592 versus 642.715
- Environ 33% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.903 versus 2.933
- 2.2x meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 57.947 versus 26.532
- Environ 67% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 223.296 versus 133.458
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5783 versus 4843
- Environ 19% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5783 versus 4843
- Environ 45% meilleur performance en 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1831 versus 1265
Caractéristiques | |
Date de sortie | 9 January 2015 versus 18 February 2014 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 73.6 GTexel / s versus 43.4 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 1024 versus 640 |
Performance á point flottant | 2,355 gflops versus 1,389 gflops |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt versus 60 Watt |
Vitesse de mémoire | 2500 MHz versus 5.4 GB/s |
Référence | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 14551 versus 11329 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.59 versus 42.463 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 720.592 versus 642.715 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.903 versus 2.933 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 57.947 versus 26.532 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 223.296 versus 133.458 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5783 versus 4843 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 versus 3329 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5783 versus 4843 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 versus 3329 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1831 versus 1265 |
Raisons pour considerer le NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti
- Environ 8% plus haut vitesse du noyau: 1020 MHz versus 944 MHz
- Environ 14% plus de la vitesse augmenté: 1085 MHz versus 950 MHz
- Environ 3% meilleur performance en PassMark - G3D Mark: 3904 versus 3775
- Environ 51% meilleur performance en PassMark - G2D Mark: 512 versus 340
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3683 versus 2566
- Environ 44% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3683 versus 2566
Caractéristiques | |
Vitesse du noyau | 1020 MHz versus 944 MHz |
Vitesse augmenté | 1085 MHz versus 950 MHz |
Référence | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3904 versus 3775 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 512 versus 340 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3683 versus 2566 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3683 versus 2566 |
Comparer les références
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti
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 965M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3775 | 3904 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 340 | 512 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 14551 | 11329 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 67.59 | 42.463 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 720.592 | 642.715 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.903 | 2.933 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 57.947 | 26.532 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 223.296 | 133.458 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5783 | 4843 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2566 | 3683 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3337 | 3329 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5783 | 4843 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2566 | 3683 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3337 | 3329 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1831 | 1265 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 750 Ti | |
---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell |
Nom de code | GM204 | GM107 |
Date de sortie | 9 January 2015 | 18 February 2014 |
Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 703 | 704 |
Genre | Laptop | Desktop |
Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $149 | |
Prix maintenant | $299.01 | |
Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 15.02 | |
Infos techniques |
||
Vitesse augmenté | 950 MHz | 1085 MHz |
Vitesse du noyau | 944 MHz | 1020 MHz |
Noyaux CUDA | 1024 | 640 |
Performance á point flottant | 2,355 gflops | 1,389 gflops |
Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 1024 | 640 |
Taux de remplissage de la texture | 73.6 GTexel / s | 43.4 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 50 Watt | 60 Watt |
Compte de transistor | 5,200 million | 1,870 million |
Sorties et ports de vidéo |
||
Connecteurs d’écran | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI, One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One mini... |
Soutien de DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) | 1 | |
Soutien de G-SYNC | ||
HDMI | ||
Soutien de l’écran analog VGA | 1 | |
Contribution d’audio pour HDMI | Internal | |
HDCP | ||
Résolution VGA maximale | 2048x1536 | |
Soutien de plusiers moniteurs | ||
Compatibilité, dimensions et exigences |
||
Soutien de bus | PCI Express 3.0 | PCI Express 3.0 |
Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Taille du laptop | large | |
Options SLI | 1 | |
Connecteurs d’énergie supplementaires | None | None |
Hauteur | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Longeur | 5.7" (14.5 cm) | |
Soutien API |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenCL | 1.1 | |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.4 |
Mémoire |
||
RAM maximale | 2 GB | 2 GB |
Bande passante de la mémoire | 80 GB / s | 86.4 GB / s |
Largeur du bus mémoire | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
Vitesse de mémoire | 2500 MHz | 5.4 GB/s |
Genre de mémoire | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Mémoire partagé | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
CUDA | ||
DSR | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
SLI | ||
3D Gaming | ||
3D Vision | ||
3D Vision Live | ||
Adaptive VSync | ||
Blu Ray 3D | ||
FXAA | ||
TXAA |