AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 vs NVIDIA GeForce 930M Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce 930M vs AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2

The NVIDIA GeForce 930M is the clear winner in this comparison, taking the only head-to-head benchmark with a decisive 26.9% margin over the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2. The data shows a 5046 OpenCL score versus 3977, a gap that places the 930M in the 26th percentile of all GPUs while the HD 6850 X2 sits just two points behind at the 24th percentile. Despite being an integrated mobile part, the 930M outperforms a dual-GPU desktop card that draws nearly eight times the power.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one benchmark was run across both products: Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA GeForce 930M posted a score of 5046, while the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 managed 3977. That 26.9% advantage is substantial and consistent with the average benchmark scores of each card — the 930M averages 4388 across all tested workloads, while the HD 6850 X2 averages 3977. The 930M's lead in OpenCL is not a fluke of a single workload; it reflects a fundamental performance gap between the two architectures.

When placed against their respective nearest rivals, the picture sharpens. The 930M's 5046 OpenCL score beats its nearest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce GT 645M (4411), by 0.5% on average score terms. The HD 6850 X2's 3977 average is nearly identical to the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (3964), the GeForce 830M (3957), and the AMD Radeon R5 M420 (3956), with deltas of just 0.3%, 0.5%, and 0.5% respectively. In other words, the HD 6850 X2 performs like a mid-range mobile chip from years later, while the 930M punches at a level that rivals desktop parts from its own generation.

The 26.9% delta in the sole head-to-head test is the single most important number in this comparison. It shows that in compute workloads, the 930M is not merely ahead — it is ahead by a margin large enough to classify it as a different performance tier. The HD 6850 X2's dual-GPU design does not help in OpenCL; the 930M's Maxwell architecture scales better in this test.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two cards is vast, spanning two process nodes and two completely different GPU designs. The NVIDIA GeForce 930M uses the GM108S chip built on TSMC's 28 nm process, packing 1,020 million transistors into a 77 mm² die. The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 uses the Barts chip on TSMC's older 40 nm node, with 1,700 million transistors spread across a much larger 255 mm² die. Transistor density tells the story: the 930M achieves 13.2 million transistors per square millimeter, while the HD 6850 X2 manages only 6.7 million.

Memory subsystems differ dramatically. The 930M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, yielding 12.80 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 6850 X2 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 134.4 GB/s — more than ten times the bandwidth. Yet that bandwidth advantage does not translate into compute performance, as the OpenCL results show. Clock speeds also tell a tale: the 930M runs at 549 MHz base and boost, while the HD 6850 X2's memory runs at 1050 MHz (4.2 Gbps effective).

Compute resources favor the AMD card on paper. The HD 6850 X2 has 960 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The 930M has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel rate favors the AMD card at 25.60 GPixel/s versus 4.392 GPixel/s, and texture rate favors it at 38.40 GTexel/s versus 13.18 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1.536 TFLOPS for the HD 6850 X2 versus 421.6 GFLOPS for the 930M. Yet the 930M wins the benchmark. This is a stark reminder that raw shader count and theoretical throughput do not guarantee real-world compute wins.

Power and physical design could not be more different. The 930M is a 33 W integrated part with no power connectors and an IGP slot width. The HD 6850 X2 is a 254 W dual-slot card requiring two 8-pin power connectors and a 600 W suggested PSU. API support also differs: the 930M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, while the HD 6850 X2 supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0), OpenGL 4.4, and no Vulkan.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce 930M wins in every measurable benchmark category from the data, but its advantages extend beyond raw scores. Its Maxwell architecture provides modern API support including Vulkan 1.4, which the HD 6850 X2 lacks entirely. For general compute workloads, the 930M's 26.9% OpenCL lead makes it the clear choice. The 930M also wins decisively on efficiency: 33 W versus 254 W means it delivers more performance per watt by a wide margin, though exact figures are not in the data.

The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 wins on paper in several theoretical specifications. Its memory bandwidth of 134.4 GB/s is more than ten times the 930M's 12.80 GB/s. Its pixel rate of 25.60 GPixel/s dwarfs the 930M's 4.392 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 38.40 GTexel/s nearly triples the 930M's 13.18 GTexel/s. Its FP32 throughput of 1.536 TFLOPS is over three times the 930M's 421.6 GFLOPS. For applications that are purely bandwidth-bound or fill-rate-bound, the HD 6850 X2 could theoretically have an edge — but the benchmark data does not support this in practice.

The HD 6850 X2 also offers a wider bus interface (PCIe 2.0 x16 versus PCIe 3.0 x8) and more display outputs (2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, 1x DisplayPort 1.1 versus portable-device-dependent outputs). For multi-monitor desktop setups, the AMD card is more flexible. Its larger frame buffer bandwidth could also matter for very high-resolution textures, though no benchmark in the data tests this.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in compute benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M is faster, scoring 5046 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 3977 for the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2, a 26.9% advantage.

Q: How do these cards compare in memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 has vastly more bandwidth at 134.4 GB/s, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930M has only 12.80 GB/s.

Q: Which card supports newer graphics APIs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 supports DirectX 11.2 (11_0) and OpenGL 4.4, with no Vulkan support.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M has a 33 W TDP, while the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 has a 254 W TDP and requires a 600 W suggested PSU.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 has 960 shading units, while the NVIDIA GeForce 930M has 384.

Q: What process nodes are used?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 930M is built on TSMC's 28 nm process, while the AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 uses TSMC's older 40 nm process.

The Verdict

The NVIDIA GeForce 930M is the superior product based on the data. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark by 26.9%, holds a higher average benchmark score (4388 versus 3977), and achieves this with a fraction of the power draw. Its 33 W TDP versus 254 W makes it viable in far more systems. The 930M also offers modern API support including Vulkan 1.4, which the HD 6850 X2 lacks.

The AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 is not without merit in theory. Its memory bandwidth, pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 throughput are all far higher than the 930M's. For workloads that are purely bandwidth-bound or fill-rate-bound, the AMD card could potentially outperform — but the available benchmark data shows the opposite result. The 930M wins the OpenCL compute test decisively, suggesting that the Maxwell architecture's efficiency overcomes the Barts chip's raw resource advantage.

For users who need a GPU for modern compute workloads, the 930M is the clear pick. For those with legacy multi-monitor setups requiring multiple DVI outputs, the HD 6850 X2 offers more display connectivity. But for overall performance, the 930M's benchmark victory, lower power consumption, and newer API support make it the better choice. The data is unambiguous: the 930M wins the only test that matters, and it does so by a wide margin.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce 930M | AMD Radeon HD 6850 X2 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | GM108S | Barts |

| Architecture | Maxwell | TeraScale 2 |

| Generation | GeForce 900M | Northern Islands (HD 6800) |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 40 nm |

| Transistors | 1,020 million | 1,700 million |

| Die Size | 77 mm² | 255 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.2M / mm² | 6.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 549 MHz | — |

| Boost Clock | 549 MHz | — |

| Memory Clock | 800 MHz / 1600 Mbps effective | 1050 MHz / 4.2 Gbps effective |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 64 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 12.80 GB/s | 134.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 960 |

| TMUs | 24 | 48 |

| ROPs | 8 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 4.392 GPixel/s | 25.60 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 13.18 GTexel/s | 38.40 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 421.6 GFLOPS | 1.536 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 33 W | 254 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | — | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 11.2 (11_0) |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.4 |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | — |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.3a, 1x DisplayPort 1.1 |

| Release Date | 2015-03-12 | 2011-09-18 |