GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 960M vs 435M among Laptop GPUs over 35W TDP

Gaming

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more

Graphics

T-Rex, Manhattan, Sky Diver Factor and Fire Strike Factor

Computing

Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 31 more

Value

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 31 more

Noise and Power

TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more

1.6

Overall Score

Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 960M 

GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 960M  based on its benchmarks and compute performance.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of GeForce GTX 960M

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 960M

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark 11 graphics score 23,777.5 vs 7,510.5 Around 3.2x better 3DMark 11 graphics score
Much higher clock speed 1,097 MHz vs 650 MHz Around 70% higher clock speed
Significantly better PassMark score 2,043 vs 661 More than 3x better PassMark score
Significantly better 3DMark06 score 5,277 vs 799 More than 6.5x better 3DMark06 score
Significantly higher effective memory clock speed 5,012 MHz vs 1,600 MHz Around 3.2x higher effective memory clock speed
Higher memory bandwidth 80.2 GB/s vs 25.6 GB/s Around 3.2x higher memory bandwidth
Much better face detection score 54.29 mPixels/s vs 4.25 mPixels/s More than 12.8x better face detection score
Better floating-point performance 1,404.2 GFLOPS vs 249.6 GFLOPS Around 5.8x better floating-point performance
Higher pixel rate 17.55 GPixel/s vs 2.6 GPixel/s 6.8x higher pixel rate
Higher texture rate 43.9 GTexel/s vs 10.4 GTexel/s Around 4.2x higher texture rate
Significantly higher memory clock speed 1,253 MHz vs 800 MHz More than 55% higher memory clock speed
Significantly better PassMark direct compute score 1,479 vs 301 Around 5x better PassMark direct compute score
More shading units 640 vs 96 544 more shading units
More render output processors 16 vs 4 12 more render output processors
More texture mapping units 40 vs 16 24 more texture mapping units
Better fire strike factor score 32.14 vs 7.97 More than 4x better fire strike factor score
Front view of GeForce GT 435M

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GT 435M

Report a correction
Lower TDP 35W vs 75W 2.1x lower TDP

Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GTX 960M vs GT 435M

PassMark Industry standard benchmark for overall graphics card performanceData courtesy Passmark

3DMark 11 Graphics Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 11 GPU performance

3DMark06 Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 9 GPU performance

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

GeForce GTX 960M
54.29 mPixels/s
GeForce GT 435M
4.25 mPixels/s

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Cloud Gate Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

PassMark Direct Compute Measures performance of general-purpose computing using Microsoft DirectCompute

Comments

comments powered by Disqus