NVIDIA GeForce 830M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive victory for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M, winning both recorded head-to-head tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 970M scores 18,946 against 4,324 for the GeForce 830M, a massive 338.2% advantage. The Vulkan result is even more lopsided: 18,292 versus 3,590, putting the GTX 970M 409.5% ahead. These are not marginal differences; they represent entirely different performance tiers.

Looking at the broader database entries, the GTX 970M’s average benchmark score of 4,628 places it in the 27th percentile of all GPUs, while the 830M’s 3,957 average sits at the 24th percentile. Although the percentile gap looks small, the raw compute workloads tell the real story. The GTX 970M’s nearest rivals in the database include the NVIDIA Quadro M3000M (4,621 average, 0.2% ahead), the AMD Radeon R5 M320 (4,657 average, 0.6% behind), and the AMD Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB (4,657 average, 0.6% behind). The 830M, by contrast, trades blows with the AMD Radeon R5 M420 (3,956, 0% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GT 745M (3,953, 0.1% ahead), and the NVIDIA Quadro K2000 (3,964, 0.2% behind).

In the direct comparison, the GTX 970M does not just outperform the 830M; it overwhelms it. The OpenCL score of 18,946 is more than four times the 830M’s 4,324. The Vulkan score of 18,292 is over five times the 830M’s 3,590. The database records two wins for the GTX 970M and zero for the 830M, with no contest in either test.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different architectural generations despite both being NVIDIA parts. The GTX 970M uses the GM204 chip based on Maxwell 2.0 architecture, while the 830M uses the GM108 chip based on the original Maxwell architecture. Both are built on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the silicon budgets diverge sharply. The GTX 970M packs 5,200 million transistors on a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per mm². The 830M contains 1,020 million transistors on a much smaller 77 mm² die, with a density of 13.2 million per mm². The densities are nearly identical, but the GTX 970M has over five times the transistor count and over five times the die area.

Core configuration differences are stark. The GTX 970M features 1,280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 48 raster operations pipelines. The 830M has 256 shading units, 16 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. That is exactly five times the shading units, five times the TMUs, and six times the ROPs in the GTX 970M. Clock speeds tell a different story: the 830M runs at 1,082 MHz base and 1,150 MHz boost, while the GTX 970M runs at 924 MHz base and 1,038 MHz boost. The 830M has higher clocks, but the GTX 970M’s massive core advantage overwhelms the frequency gap.

Memory architecture diverges completely. The GTX 970M uses 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus, delivering 120.3 GB/s of bandwidth at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The 830M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, delivering just 14.40 GB/s at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective). That is more than an eightfold bandwidth difference. The GTX 970M also supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the 830M only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4. The GTX 970M’s pixel rate is 49.82 GPixel/s versus 9.200 GPixel/s for the 830M, and its texture rate is 83.04 GTexel/s versus 18.40 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is rated at 2.657 TFLOPS for the GTX 970M versus 588.8 GFLOPS for the 830M.

The GTX 970M is a 900M-series mobile part on an MXM module with an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, while the 830M is an 800M-series integrated graphics processor on a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface. The 830M carries a 33 W TDP rating; the GTX 970M has no TDP listed in the database. Both are marked as end-of-life products, with the GTX 970M releasing on 2014-10-06 and the 830M on 2014-03-11. The GTX 970M’s predecessor is the GeForce 800M and its successor is the GeForce 10 Mobile. The 830M’s predecessor is the GeForce 700M and its successor is the GeForce 900M.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M scores 18,946 in Geekbench OpenCL, compared to 4,324 for the GeForce 830M. The GTX 970M leads by 338.2%.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 970M scores 18,292 versus 3,590 for the 830M, a 409.5% advantage. This is the largest recorded margin between the two.

Q: What are the memory size and type differences?

A: The GTX 970M has 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 192-bit bus with 120.3 GB/s bandwidth. The 830M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The GTX 970M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the 830M supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GTX 970M has 1,280 shading units, exactly five times the 256 shading units found in the 830M. The GTX 970M also has 80 TMUs versus 16, and 48 ROPs versus 8.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The GTX 970M has an average benchmark score of 4,628, while the 830M averages 3,957. The GTX 970M sits at the 27th percentile of all GPUs, and the 830M at the 24th.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M | NVIDIA GeForce 830M |

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

| Chip | GM204 | GM108 |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell |

| Generation | GeForce 900M | GeForce 800M |

| Transistors | 5,200 million | 1,020 million |

| Die Size | 398 mm² | 77 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.1M / mm² | 13.2M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 924 MHz | 1082 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1038 MHz | 1150 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 6 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 192 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 120.3 GB/s | 14.40 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 256 |

| TMUs | 80 | 16 |

| ROPs | 48 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 49.82 GPixel/s | 9.200 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 83.04 GTexel/s | 18.40 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.657 TFLOPS | 588.8 GFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 33 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

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

| Release Date | 2014-10-06 | 2014-03-11 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 800M | GeForce 700M |

| Successor | GeForce 10 Mobile | GeForce 900M |

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M outperforms the GeForce 830M in every recorded benchmark, with deltas of 338.2% in OpenCL and 409.5% in Vulkan. The GTX 970M wins both head-to-head tests, and the 830M has no recorded wins. The GTX 970M’s average benchmark score of 4,628 is 17% higher than the 830M’s 3,957. Users seeking maximum mobile graphics performance from these two options should select the GTX 970M. The 830M, with its lower core counts, smaller memory bus, and DDR3 memory, is a fundamentally weaker part. The GTX 970M’s nearest rivals in the database are the Quadro M3000M and Radeon R5 M320, while the 830M competes with the Radeon R5 M420 and GeForce GT 745M. The performance tier separation is clear.

Where Each One Wins

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970M:

• Wins in Geekbench OpenCL: 18,946 versus 4,324, a 338.2% margin.
• Wins in Geekbench Vulkan: 18,292 versus 3,590, a 409.5% margin.
• Has 5x the shading units, 5x the TMUs, and 6x the ROPs of the 830M.
• Delivers 120.3 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 14.40 GB/s.
• Supports DirectX 12 (12_1), a higher feature level than the 830M’s 12 (11_0).
• Higher transistor count (5,200 million versus 1,020 million) and larger die (398 mm² versus 77 mm²).
• FP32 compute of 2.657 TFLOPS versus 588.8 GFLOPS.

NVIDIA GeForce 830M:

• Has a higher base clock (1082 MHz versus 924 MHz) and higher boost clock (1150 MHz versus 1038 MHz).
• Higher transistor density (13.2M / mm² versus 13.1M / mm²), a marginal edge.
• Lower power footprint with a 33 W TDP; the GTX 970M has no TDP listed.
• Uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the GTX 970M uses MXM-B (3.0), which may matter in specific laptop form factors.
• Released earlier (2014-03-11 versus 2014-10-06), making it an earlier generation product.

The 830M’s only advantages are clock speed, density, and power draw. None of these translate into benchmark wins. The GTX 970M dominates in every computational workload recorded, making it the clear choice for demanding graphics tasks.