NVIDIA GeForce 825M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two GPUs into entirely different performance classes. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti wins the only direct head-to-head comparison recorded in the database, taking the Geekbench OpenCL test with a score of 18,129 against the NVIDIA GeForce 825M's 3,694. That is a 390.8% advantage, a margin so large that the two chips cannot be considered competitors in any practical sense.

The GTX 1050 Ti also holds a strong position in the broader database rankings. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 4,193, placing it at the 25th percentile of all GPUs. The 825M, by contrast, has an average score of 3,694 and sits at the 22nd percentile. While both are below the midpoint of the database, the 1050 Ti's percentile ranking is meaningfully higher, and its raw score advantage of roughly 499 points (13.5% higher) reflects a consistent performance lead.

Looking at the 1050 Ti's individual results, it shows particular strength in compute-oriented workloads. Its Geekbench OpenCL score of 18,129 is nearly double its Vulkan score of 10,001 and more than double its Metal score of 7,834. The Passmark G3D score of 6,340 is the highest among its Passmark results, while the older DirectX 9 test produces a score of 104, suggesting that legacy API performance is relatively strong. The 825M has only one recorded benchmark result in the database, the Geekbench OpenCL score of 3,694, so its performance profile cannot be characterized beyond that single measurement.

For use-case planning, the data indicates that the 1050 Ti is suited to tasks that stress general compute, DirectX 11 gaming, and legacy DirectX 9 titles. The 825M, with its single OpenCL result, appears limited to light compute duties. There is no recorded scenario where the 825M wins against the 1050 Ti.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations and are built on different manufacturing processes. The GTX 1050 Ti uses the GP107 chip with NVIDIA's Pascal architecture, fabricated on a 14 nm process at Samsung. The 825M uses the GK208 chip with Kepler 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This process difference is substantial: the 14 nm node allows the 1050 Ti to pack 3,300 million transistors into a 132 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 25.0 million per mm². The 825M contains 1,020 million transistors on an 87 mm² die, for a density of 11.7 million per mm². The 1050 Ti has more than three times the transistor count and roughly 1.5 times the die area, but more than double the transistor density.

Clock speeds also diverge sharply. The 1050 Ti runs at a base clock of 1,291 MHz with a boost clock of 1,392 MHz. The 825M operates at 850 MHz base and 941 MHz boost. The 1050 Ti's boost clock is 451 MHz higher than the 825M's boost clock, a 47.9% advantage in raw clock frequency. Memory clocks differ as well: the 1050 Ti uses 1,752 MHz memory with a 7 Gbps effective data rate, while the 825M uses 900 MHz memory with a 1,800 Mbps effective rate.

The memory subsystems are not comparable. The 1050 Ti has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.1 GB/s of bandwidth. The 825M has 1,024 MB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, delivering 14.40 GB/s. The 1050 Ti offers roughly 7.8 times the memory bandwidth. The 825M's memory configuration is a clear bottleneck, as the 64-bit bus and DDR3 type are both dated.

Core configurations follow the same pattern. The 1050 Ti has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The 825M has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The 1050 Ti has exactly double the shading units, 1.5 times the TMUs, and four times the ROPs. Pixel rate is 44.54 GPixel/s for the 1050 Ti versus 7.528 GPixel/s for the 825M. Texture rate is 66.82 GTexel/s versus 30.11 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.138 TFLOPS versus 722.7 GFLOPS. The 1050 Ti also supports FP16 at 33.41 GFLOPS with a 1:64 ratio, while the 825M has no recorded FP16 capability.

Feature support differs in API levels. The 1050 Ti supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 825M supports DirectX 12 with feature level 11_0, OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The Vulkan version gap is notable, with the 1050 Ti supporting a newer specification. The 825M is also limited to a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the 1050 Ti uses PCIe 3.0 x16.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains exactly one head-to-head benchmark result between these two GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL. The GTX 1050 Ti scores 18,129, while the 825M scores 3,694. The delta is 390.8% in favor of the 1050 Ti. This is not a close contest; it is a complete rout. For context, the 1050 Ti's nearest rivals in the overall database are the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (average score 4,170, delta 0.6%), the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4,151, delta 1%), and the NVIDIA Quadro K3000M (4,241, delta -1.1%). The 825M's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GT 740M (3,717, delta -0.6%), the NVIDIA Quadro 3000M (3,718, delta -0.6%), and the AMD Radeon HD 6770 (3,649, delta 1.2%).

The 1050 Ti's OpenCL score of 18,129 is roughly 4.9 times the 825M's score. Even when comparing the 1050 Ti's other compute-oriented results, the gap remains wide. Its Vulkan score of 10,001 is 2.7 times the 825M's OpenCL score. Its Metal score of 7,834 is 2.1 times. The 825M's single result is so low that it falls below the 1050 Ti's Passmark G3D score of 6,340, meaning the 825M loses even against the 1050 Ti's DirectX 11 performance.

The 1050 Ti also shows internal consistency across its benchmark suite. Its Passmark DirectX 9 score of 104 is its best legacy API result, while its DirectX 11 score of 45 and DirectX 12 score of 26 reflect the expected scaling. Its Passmark GPU Compute score of 2,652 is respectable for a chip of its class. The 825M has no comparable data, so no further head-to-head analysis is possible.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti has an average benchmark score of 4,193, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce 825M's 3,694. The 1050 Ti leads by 499 points, a 13.5% advantage.

Q: How large is the performance gap in OpenCL compute?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 1050 Ti scores 18,129 against the 825M's 3,694, a delta of 390.8% in favor of the 1050 Ti.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each GPU?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.1 GB/s bandwidth. The 825M has 1,024 MB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, but at different feature levels. The 1050 Ti supports DirectX 12 with feature level 12_1, while the 825M supports DirectX 12 with feature level 11_0.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has 768 shading units, exactly double the 384 shading units found in the 825M.

Q: What is the transistor density difference?

A: The 1050 Ti, built on a 14 nm process, has a transistor density of 25.0 million per mm². The 825M, on a 28 nm process, has 11.7 million per mm².

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti outperforms the NVIDIA GeForce 825M in every recorded metric. The 1050 Ti holds a 390.8% lead in the only head-to-head benchmark, a 13.5% lead in average benchmark score, and a higher percentile ranking (25th versus 22nd). The 825M wins zero benchmarks in the database.

For users selecting between these two, the choice depends on workload. If the task involves general compute, DirectX 11 or 12 gaming, or any modern API workload, the 1050 Ti is the only viable option. Its 4 GB GDDR5 memory, 112.1 GB/s bandwidth, and 2.138 TFLOPS FP32 throughput are orders of magnitude beyond the 825M's capabilities. The 825M, with its 1 GB DDR3 memory and 14.40 GB/s bandwidth, is suitable only for the lightest compute tasks or as an integrated-class solution for portable devices. Its 33 W TDP is much lower than the 1050 Ti's 75 W, which may matter in power-constrained systems, but the performance penalty is severe.

The 1050 Ti's nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Radeon R5 M330 and the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M and K3000M, with score deltas under 2%. The 825M's nearest rivals are the GT 740M and Quadro 3000M, also within 1.2%. This confirms that each GPU sits in its own performance tier, and the 1050 Ti is roughly one full tier above the 825M. The verdict is straightforward: the 1050 Ti for any real work, the 825M only for legacy or ultra-low-power scenarios.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti | NVIDIA GeForce 825M |

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

| Architecture | Pascal | Kepler 2.0 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 3,300 million | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | 132 mm² | 87 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 25.0M / mm² | 11.7M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1291 MHz | 850 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1392 MHz | 941 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1752 MHz, 7 Gbps effective | 900 MHz, 1800 Mbps effective |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.1 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 384 |

| TMUs | 48 | 32 |

| ROPs | 32 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 44.54 GPixel/s | 7.528 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 66.82 GTexel/s | 30.11 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.138 TFLOPS | 722.7 GFLOPS |

| FP16 | 33.41 GFLOPS (1:64) | null |

| TDP | 75 W | 33 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | None |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | null |

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

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a | Portable Device Dependent |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.2.175 |

| Release Date | 2016-10-24 | 2014-01-26 |

| Launch MSRP | 139 USD | null |