AMD Radeon Vega 11 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M and the AMD Radeon Vega 11 are both end-of-life graphics solutions, yet they represent fundamentally different design philosophies: a dedicated mobile GPU versus an integrated processor graphics unit. Benchmark data from the FACT PACK shows the GTX 965M holds a decisive lead in the two shared tests, with an average benchmark score of 14404 compared to the Vega 11’s 14352. The two GPUs occupy the same 56th percentile against all GPUs, but the NVIDIA part edges ahead by a narrow 0.4% margin in average score, according to the nearestRivals data. This page breaks down every measurable difference, from raw compute to architectural choices, using only the supplied specifications and benchmark results.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most significant victory for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M comes in the Geekbench Vulkan test. Here, the GTX 965M scores 14299, while the AMD Radeon Vega 11 trails at 12273. The deltaPct of 16.5% in favor of NVIDIA is substantial, indicating that the Maxwell 2.0 architecture delivers markedly stronger performance in this cross-platform graphics API. This result suggests a clear advantage in scenarios that leverage Vulkan’s low-overhead rendering, as the GTX 965M outperforms its rival by more than one-sixth of the latter’s score.

In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 965M again wins, but by a smaller margin. The NVIDIA part scores 14509, while the Vega 11 produces 13392. The deltaPct here is 8.3%, meaning the GTX 965M is roughly 8% faster in general-purpose compute workloads. While this is a comfortable lead, it is less pronounced than the Vulkan gap, suggesting that the Vega 11’s compute capabilities are comparatively stronger relative to its graphics performance. The AMD part’s higher FP32 throughput of 1.971 TFLOPS versus the GTX 965M’s 1.946 TFLOPS likely narrows the OpenCL gap, even though the NVIDIA GPU still comes out ahead.

Across the two head-to-head benchmarks, the GTX 965M secures 2 wins, while the Vega 11 records 0 wins. The average score difference is small—14404 versus 14352—but the per-test deltas tell a different story: the NVIDIA part wins by 8.3% and 16.5%, respectively. The nearestRivals data confirms this competitive positioning, listing the GTX 965M as the top performer among its peers, with the Vega 11 sitting just 0.4% behind in average score. The AMD Radeon RX Vega 11, a separate variant, sits between them at 14385, showing that the Vega 11 is not the strongest AMD entry in this performance band.

The Verdict

For users prioritizing consistent graphics performance across both OpenCL and Vulkan, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M is the clear choice based on the data. It wins both head-to-head tests, with deltas of 8.3% and 16.5%, and holds a higher average benchmark score of 14404. The GTX 965M’s dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth provides a fixed, predictable memory subsystem, whereas the Vega 11 relies on system memory with bandwidth that is “System Dependent” per the FACT PACK. This fixed resource likely contributes to its superior benchmark results.

The AMD Radeon Vega 11, however, is not without merit from a specification standpoint. It matches the GTX 965M in the 56th percentile and trails by only 0.4% in average score, making it a near-equal in aggregate performance. Its 15 W TDP, as listed in the specifications, is a notable advantage over the GTX 965M, which has no TDP figure provided, though the NVIDIA part is a mobile MXM module. For systems where power efficiency is paramount and the motherboard provides the display outputs, the Vega 11’s integrated design eliminates the need for a separate graphics card. Still, the benchmark data shows that the GTX 965M delivers higher raw scores in every shared test, so users seeking maximum measured performance should opt for the NVIDIA solution.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on distinct architectures and process nodes. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M uses the GM204 chip based on Maxwell 2.0, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon Vega 11, in contrast, uses the Picasso chip with GCN 5.0 architecture, built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The smaller process node allows AMD to pack 4,940 million transistors into a 210 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 23.5M per mm². NVIDIA’s larger chip contains 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, with a lower density of 13.1M per mm².

These architectural choices translate into different compute resource allocations. The GTX 965M features 1024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, producing a pixel rate of 30.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 60.80 GTexel/s. The Vega 11 has fewer shading units at 704, fewer TMUs at 44, and only 8 ROPs, resulting in a pixel rate of 11.20 GPixel/s but a comparable texture rate of 61.60 GTexel/s. Notably, the Vega 11 achieves a slightly higher FP32 performance of 1.971 TFLOPS versus the GTX 965M’s 1.946 TFLOPS, and it also supports FP16 at 3.942 TFLOPS (2:1), a feature the GTX 965M lacks entirely.

Memory architecture differs fundamentally. The GTX 965M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, providing 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The Vega 11 uses “System Shared” memory, with the bus width and bandwidth listed as “System Shared” and “System Dependent,” respectively. This means the Vega 11’s memory performance varies based on the host system’s RAM, while the GTX 965M offers fixed, dedicated bandwidth. The GTX 965M also reports Vulkan 1.4 support, while the Vega 11 supports Vulkan 1.3, and both support DirectX 12 (12_1) and OpenGL 4.6.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M has an average benchmark score of 14404, while the AMD Radeon Vega 11 scores 14352, giving the NVIDIA part a 0.4% advantage as listed in the nearestRivals data.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap between the two?

A: In the Geekbench Vulkan test, the GTX 965M scores 14299 versus the Vega 11’s 12273, resulting in a 16.5% delta in favor of NVIDIA, according to the headToHeadBenchmarks.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon Vega 11 have any compute advantage?

A: Yes, the Vega 11 has a higher FP32 performance at 1.971 TFLOPS compared to the GTX 965M’s 1.946 TFLOPS, and it also supports FP16 at 3.942 TFLOPS (2:1), which the NVIDIA part does not offer.

Q: What is the transistor density of each chip?

A: The AMD Vega 11 has a transistor density of 23.5M per mm² on its 12 nm process, while the NVIDIA GTX 965M has a density of 13.1M per mm² on its 28 nm process.

Q: Which GPU relies on system memory?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 11 uses “System Shared” memory for both size and type, with bandwidth listed as “System Dependent,” whereas the GTX 965M has dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory.

Q: What are the release dates for each product?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M was released on 2015-01-08, while the AMD Radeon Vega 11 came later on 2019-09-29, per the FACT PACK data.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M wins decisively in both benchmark categories measured. In Geekbench OpenCL, it leads by 8.3%, scoring 14509 against 13392. This makes it the stronger choice for compute workloads that utilize OpenCL, such as certain rendering tasks or scientific simulations. In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 965M extends its lead to 16.5%, scoring 14299 against 12273, indicating superior performance in modern game engines and graphics applications that leverage Vulkan. With 2 wins and 0 losses in the head-to-head benchmarks, the NVIDIA part is the outright winner for any measured performance metric.

The AMD Radeon Vega 11 wins in areas not covered by the benchmark suite. Its 15 W TDP, as listed in the specifications, makes it a low-power integrated solution, whereas the GTX 965M has no TDP figure provided. The Vega 11 also offers FP16 support at 3.942 TFLOPS, a capability absent from the GTX 965M, which could benefit workloads that use mixed-precision arithmetic. Additionally, the Vega 11 has a higher transistor density (23.5M per mm² versus 13.1M per mm²) and a smaller die size (210 mm² versus 398 mm²), reflecting a more modern manufacturing process. For systems where power consumption and integration are priorities, the Vega 11 is the better fit, but it cannot match the GTX 965M’s benchmark results.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M uses the GM204 chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, while the AMD Radeon Vega 11 uses the Picasso chip on a 12 nm GlobalFoundries process. Transistor counts are close—5,200 million for NVIDIA versus 4,940 million for AMD—but die sizes diverge sharply: 398 mm² for the GTX 965M and 210 mm² for the Vega 11. The GTX 965M has more shading units (1024 versus 704), more TMUs (64 versus 44), and more ROPs (32 versus 8). Its pixel rate is 30.40 GPixel/s versus 11.20 GPixel/s, while texture rates are nearly identical at 60.80 GTexel/s and 61.60 GTexel/s, respectively.

Clock speeds differ significantly. The GTX 965M runs at a base clock of 924 MHz and a boost clock of 950 MHz, with memory at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The Vega 11 has a much lower base clock of 300 MHz but a higher boost clock of 1400 MHz, and its memory is “System Shared.” The GTX 965M offers 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth, while the Vega 11’s memory is entirely system-dependent. FP32 performance is similar (1.946 TFLOPS versus 1.971 TFLOPS), but the Vega 11 adds FP16 at 3.942 TFLOPS. The GTX 965M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the Vega 11 supports Vulkan 1.3. Finally, the GTX 965M is an MXM Module with a bus interface of MXM-B (3.0) and portable-device-dependent display outputs, while the Vega 11 is an IGP with motherboard-dependent outputs and no power connectors required.