NVIDIA GeForce 825M vs NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two GPUs compare in raw benchmark scores?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 825M scores 3,694 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation scores 3,596 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. These tests are not directly comparable due to different workloads, but each sits near the 21st–22nd percentile of all GPUs.

Q: Which GPU has a higher transistor density?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation has a transistor density of 121.1M per mm², which is over 10 times denser than the GeForce 825M's 11.7M per mm². The RTX 5000 packs 45,900 million transistors on a 379 mm² die, versus 1,020 million transistors on an 87 mm² die for the 825M.

Q: What are the memory specifications of each GPU?

A: The GeForce 825M has 1024 MB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation has 16 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 256-bit bus with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth — a 40x bandwidth advantage.

Q: Which GPU supports ray tracing and tensor cores?

A: Only the RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation includes 76 ray tracing cores and 304 tensor cores. The GeForce 825M has no RT cores and no tensor cores, reflecting its Kepler 2.0 architecture from 2014.

Q: How do the closest rivals compare to each GPU?

A: The GeForce 825M's nearest rival is the GeForce GT 740M, which scores 3,717 (0.6% higher). The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation's nearest rival is the GeForce GT 545, which scores 3,594 (0.1% lower). The AMD Radeon HD 6770 appears as a rival to both, scoring 3,649.

Q: What is the production status and release timing?

A: The GeForce 825M is end-of-life and was released on January 26, 2014. The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation is active and was released on March 20, 2023. The 825M's predecessor is GeForce 700M and successor is GeForce 900M; the RTX 5000's predecessor is Ampere-MW and successor is Blackwell-MW.

Architecture Differences

The GeForce 825M is built on the GK208 chip using Kepler 2.0 architecture, produced on TSMC's 28 nm process. The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation uses the AD103 chip with Ada Lovelace architecture on a 5 nm process. This process shrink is foundational: it enables the RTX 5000 to house 45,900 million transistors versus 1,020 million in the 825M, a 45x increase, while the die size only grows from 87 mm² to 379 mm².

The shading unit count tells a similar story. The 825M has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The RTX 5000 has 9,728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs — roughly 25x, 9.5x, and 14x more, respectively. Critically, the RTX 5000 adds 76 RT cores and 304 tensor cores, which are entirely absent from the 825M. This is not just a generational leap; it is a functional expansion into ray tracing and AI-accelerated workloads that the Kepler part cannot perform at all.

Memory architecture diverges sharply. The 825M uses 1024 MB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, topping out at 14.40 GB/s. The RTX 5000 uses 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, reaching 576.0 GB/s. The 40x bandwidth gap is far larger than the 16x capacity gap, meaning the RTX 5000 is disproportionately better at memory-bound tasks. The 825M's memory clock is 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective), while the RTX 5000 runs at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective).

Clock speeds also favor the newer part. The 825M has a base clock of 850 MHz and boost of 941 MHz. The RTX 5000 has a base of 1425 MHz and boost of 2115 MHz. Combined with the massive core count, this yields a pixel rate of 236.9 GPixel/s and texture rate of 643.0 GTexel/s for the RTX 5000, versus 7.528 GPixel/s and 30.11 GTexel/s for the 825M.

API support reflects the architectural gap. The 825M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RTX 5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The 825M's PCIe 3.0 x8 interface is also two generations behind the RTX 5000's PCIe 4.0 x16. Both use IGP slot width with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

There are no direct head-to-head benchmark entries in the data, and neither GPU records a win in such tests. However, each has its own benchmark result that can be contextualized against its nearest rivals.

The GeForce 825M's Geekbench OpenCL score of 3,694 places it just 0.6% below the GeForce GT 740M (3,717) and 0.6% below the Quadro 3000M (3,718). It is 1.2% above the AMD Radeon HD 6770 (3,649) and 1.2% below the GeForce GT 635M (3,740). These deltas are tight — all four rivals sit within a 2.5% band. The 825M is effectively at parity with its class, with no dominant win or loss.

The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,596 is 0.1% above the GeForce GT 545 (3,594) and 0.6% above the GeForce GT 735M (3,616). It falls 0.9% short of the GeForce GTX 1050 (3,629) and 1.5% short of the AMD Radeon HD 6770 (3,649). Again, the rival set is tightly clustered, with all deltas within 1.6%. Neither GPU demonstrates a decisive benchmark victory over its immediate competition.

The percentile data reinforces this parity. Both GPUs sit at nearly the same percentile ranking: the 825M at 22nd percentile and the RTX 5000 at 21st percentile of all GPUs. This is notable given the enormous architectural differences. The 825M's 2014-era Kepler design and the RTX 5000's 2023 Ada Lovelace design both land in the lower quarter of the GPU population, though the RTX 5000 achieves this with modern features like ray tracing and tensor cores that the 825M simply lacks.

Specification Differences

| Specification | GeForce 825M | RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation |

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

| Process node | 28 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 1,020 million | 45,900 million |

| Die size | 87 mm² | 379 mm² |

| Transistor density | 11.7M / mm² | 121.1M / mm² |

| Base clock | 850 MHz | 1425 MHz |

| Boost clock | 941 MHz | 2115 MHz |

| Memory clock | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) | 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective) |

| Memory size | 1024 MB | 16 GB |

| Memory type | DDR3 | GDDR6 |

| Memory bus width | 64 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | 576.0 GB/s |

| Shading units | 384 | 9728 |

| TMUs | 32 | 304 |

| ROPs | 8 | 112 |

| RT cores | None | 76 |

| Tensor cores | None | 304 |

| Pixel rate | 7.528 GPixel/s | 236.9 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 30.11 GTexel/s | 643.0 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 722.7 GFLOPS | 41.15 TFLOPS |

| FP16 | Not specified | 41.15 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 33 W | 120 W |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Release date | 2014-01-26 | 2023-03-20 |

| Production status | End-of-life | Active |

The FP32 compute figures represent the single largest relative gap: 41.15 TFLOPS versus 722.7 GFLOPS is a 57x difference. The RTX 5000 also has 1:1 FP16 performance at 41.15 TFLOPS, a capability the 825M does not specify. Both GPUs share OpenGL 4.6 support, IGP slot width, no power connectors, and portable-device-dependent display outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce 825M wins on power efficiency in absolute terms, with a 33 W TDP versus 120 W for the RTX 5000. For a 2014 mobile part, this made it suitable for thin-and-light portable devices where thermal and power budgets were extremely tight. Its smaller die (87 mm²) and lower transistor count also made it cheaper to produce, though pricing data is not available. In benchmark parity terms, the 825M sits at the 22nd percentile and trades blows with GT 740M, Quadro 3000M, and GT 635M within a 1.2% band — it is a competent entry-level part for its era.

The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation wins on every compute and memory metric that matters for modern workloads. Its 76 RT cores enable hardware ray tracing, and its 304 tensor cores accelerate AI inference and DLSS-style workloads. The 16 GB GDDR6 frame buffer with 576.0 GB/s bandwidth supports large datasets and high-resolution textures that would be impossible on the 825M's 1 GB DDR3. The 41.15 TFLOPS FP32 throughput is a workstation-class compute envelope, and the 1:1 FP16 rate doubles down on precision-flexible compute.

The RTX 5000 also wins on interface readiness: PCIe 4.0 x16 provides 4x the lane width and a newer protocol versus PCIe 3.0 x8. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate and Vulkan 1.4 support future-proof it for current and upcoming titles, whereas the 825M is capped at DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The 5 nm process node gives it a transistor density of 121.1M / mm², which is the enabling factor for all of these advantages.

In terms of use cases, the 825M is a legacy part for basic 2D/3D acceleration in old notebooks. The RTX 5000 is a mobile workstation GPU for ray-traced rendering, AI model inference, and high-bandwidth data processing. The 825M's only practical win is for retro compatibility or ultra-low-power systems; the RTX 5000 wins for any performance-oriented task.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation is the superior GPU by every architectural and performance metric recorded. It offers 57x the FP32 compute, 40x the memory bandwidth, 25x the shading units, and adds RT and tensor cores that the GeForce 825M does not have. It also supports a newer DirectX version, a newer PCIe standard, and a much larger frame buffer.

However, the benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story than the specifications. The 825M's Geekbench OpenCL score of 3,694 and the RTX 5000's 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3,596 place both GPUs at nearly the same percentile rank (22nd vs 21st). This is because the benchmarks measure different workloads — OpenCL compute versus DX12 rasterization — and the RTX 5000's advanced features like ray tracing and tensor cores are not reflected in the Steel Nomad score. The RTX 5000's nearest rivals include the GTX 1050 and Radeon HD 6770, which are older, lower-tier parts, indicating that its benchmark result underrepresents its actual capabilities.

For a buyer in 2014, the 825M was a fine entry-level mobile GPU, sitting within 1.2% of its closest competitors. For a buyer today, the RTX 5000 is the only choice if ray tracing, AI acceleration, or large memory pools are needed. The 825M is end-of-life and should only be considered for legacy systems. The RTX 5000 is active, current, and built on a process node that is 5.6x smaller, enabling a transistor density over 10x higher.

The verdict is straightforward: pick the RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation for any modern workload that can use its compute, memory, or specialized cores. Pick the GeForce 825M only if you need a low-power (33 W) part for an older platform and do not care about performance. The data does not support any other conclusion.