GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce 920M and the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 represent two distinct eras of mobile and compact graphics. The 920M is a legacy Kepler part from the GeForce 900M generation, while the RTX 4010 is a modern Ampere-based product from the GeForce 40-series. The data shows they are separated by nearly a decade of architectural evolution, yet they occupy similar low-level performance percentiles. This analysis will dissect their benchmark scores, architectural differences, and use-case scenarios based strictly on the provided facts.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

A direct comparison between these two GPUs is complicated by the fact that they were tested with different benchmark suites. The GeForce 920M has results for Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan, while the GeForce RTX 4010 was tested using 3DMark Steel Nomad (DX12). The 920M scores 3,725 in Geekbench OpenCL and 2,849 in Geekbench Vulkan, giving it an average benchmark score of 3,287. The RTX 4010's single 3DMark score is 2,893, which also serves as its average benchmark score.

Looking at the average scores alone, the 920M appears to lead with a 3,287 average versus the RTX 4010's 2,893. However, this is a misleading comparison because the benchmarks measure different workloads. The 920M's OpenCL score of 3,725 is its strongest result, while its Vulkan score of 2,849 is closer to the RTX 4010's 3DMark figure. The RTX 4010's score of 2,893 in a modern DX12 test like Steel Nomad is notable because it is achieved in a much more demanding API and workload type.

The percentile rankings place both GPUs in the bottom tier of all GPUs. The 920M sits at the 20th percentile, while the RTX 4010 is at the 18th percentile. This means neither card is positioned for high-end performance. However, the context of their rivalries tells a different story. The 920M's nearest rivals include the GeForce GT 730M (average score 3,316, delta -0.9%) and the Intel HD Graphics 530 (average score 3,332, delta -1.4%). The 920M is effectively a peer of these parts, sitting just 0.9% above the GT 730M and 1.4% below the HD 530. It also leads the GeForce GT 640 by 2.4%.

The RTX 4010's nearest rivals are drastically different in class. It is within 1% of the GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB (average score 2,907, delta -0.5%), the RTX PRO 4000 Blackwell SFF (average score 2,910, delta -0.6%), and the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB (average score 2,913, delta -0.7%). This is a crucial insight: the RTX 4010's 3DMark result places it on par with much larger, more expensive desktop GPUs. In the specific DX12 workload of Steel Nomad, the RTX 4010 is only 0.5% behind the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB, despite being a vastly different product. This suggests that the RTX 4010's architecture is extraordinarily efficient in this particular test, or that the 3DMark score is not representative of overall compute performance.

The most significant takeaway is that the 920M wins in raw average score due to its OpenCL result, but the RTX 4010's performance in a modern API benchmark is far more impressive relative to its peer group. The 920M is competing with 2013-2015 era integrated and entry-level graphics, while the RTX 4010 is trading blows with contemporary mid-range desktop cards in a single test.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is immense. The GeForce 920M is built on the GK208B chip, utilizing the Kepler 2.0 architecture. It is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, containing 1,020 million transistors on an 87 mm² die. The transistor density is 11.7 million per mm². In contrast, the RTX 4010 uses the GA107 chip with the Ampere architecture, built on Samsung's 8 nm process. It packs 8,700 million transistors into a 200 mm² die, achieving a density of 43.5 million per mm². The RTX 4010 has over 8.5 times the transistor count and nearly 3.7 times the transistor density.

The compute resources differ substantially. The 920M has 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. The RTX 4010 doubles the shading units to 768 but reduces TMUs to 24 and doubles ROPs to 16. The RTX 4010 also introduces dedicated hardware that the 920M lacks entirely: 6 ray tracing cores and 24 tensor cores. This is a fundamental feature gap. The 920M cannot perform hardware-accelerated ray tracing or tensor-based AI workloads, while the RTX 4010 is fully equipped for both.

Clock speeds and memory technology also show the generational leap. The 920M has a base and boost clock of 954 MHz, which is fixed with no boost variation. The RTX 4010 has a base clock of 1,417 MHz and a boost clock of 1,762 MHz. The 920M uses 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, delivering 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth. The RTX 4010 uses 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on the same 64-bit bus, but delivers 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth, a 6.67x increase.

The API support further highlights the age difference. The 920M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RTX 4010 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The RTX 4010 also has a much higher pixel rate (28.19 GPixel/s vs 7.632 GPixel/s) and texture rate (42.29 GTexel/s vs 30.53 GTexel/s). The FP32 compute is dramatically different: the 920M offers 732.7 GFLOPS, while the RTX 4010 offers 2.706 TFLOPS, a 3.7x advantage. The RTX 4010 also has FP16 performance at 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the 920M has no listed FP16 capability.

Where Each One Wins

The GeForce 920M wins in the legacy OpenCL benchmark, posting a score of 3,725. This is its strongest area, and it contributes to a higher average benchmark score (3,287) than the RTX 4010 (2,893). For users running older applications that rely on OpenCL compute, the 920M shows a surprising edge. It also wins on power efficiency in terms of raw wattage, with a TDP of 33 W compared to the RTX 4010's 50 W. The 920M is also an IGP form factor with no power connectors, making it suitable for ultra-compact or low-power systems where the RTX 4010's single-slot design with no power connectors but a 250 W suggested PSU would be overkill.

The GeForce RTX 4010 wins in every modern compute metric. Its FP32 performance of 2.706 TFLOPS is 3.7x higher than the 920M's 732.7 GFLOPS. Its pixel rate (28.19 GPixel/s) is 3.7x higher, and its texture rate (42.29 GTexel/s) is 1.38x higher. The RTX 4010 also has 4 GB of GDDR6 memory versus 2 GB of DDR3, which is critical for modern textures and datasets. The presence of ray tracing and tensor cores means the RTX 4010 can handle workloads the 920M simply cannot, such as DLSS or ray-traced effects in supported applications.

In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX 4010 scores 2,893, which places it within 1% of the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB and the RTX 4060 Ti 8 GB. This is a massive win for the RTX 4010 in terms of competitive positioning. The 920M has no equivalent DX12 result, so it cannot compete in this specific modern gaming workload. The RTX 4010 also supports PCIe 4.0 x8, while the 920M is limited to PCIe 3.0 x8, offering double the bandwidth for data transfer.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce 920M has a higher average benchmark score of 3,287, compared to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010's average of 2,893.

Q: What is the performance difference between the RTX 4010 and the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB in the 3DMark test?

A: In the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 test, the RTX 4010 scores 2,893, which is only 0.5% behind the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB's score of 2,907.

Q: Does the GeForce 920M support ray tracing?

A: No, the GeForce 920M, based on the Kepler 2.0 architecture, has no ray tracing cores. The GeForce RTX 4010, based on Ampere, has 6 ray tracing cores.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each GPU provide?

A: The GeForce 920M provides 14.40 GB/s of bandwidth from its 2 GB DDR3 memory. The GeForce RTX 4010 provides 96.00 GB/s of bandwidth from its 4 GB GDDR6 memory.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The 920M's GK208B chip has a transistor density of 11.7 million per mm². The RTX 4010's GA107 chip has a density of 43.5 million per mm².

Q: Which API versions are supported by each GPU?

A: The 920M supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. The RTX 4010 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4.

Specification Differences

The following table highlights the key specification differences where the two GPUs diverge.

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce 920M | NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4010 |

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

| Architecture | Kepler 2.0 | Ampere |

| Process Node | 28 nm (TSMC) | 8 nm (Samsung) |

| Transistors | 1,020 million | 8,700 million |

| Die Size | 87 mm² | 200 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 11.7M / mm² | 43.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 954 MHz | 1417 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 954 MHz | 1762 MHz |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | DDR3 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Clock | 900 MHz / 1800 Mbps effective | 1500 MHz / 12 Gbps effective |

| Bandwidth | 14.40 GB/s | 96.00 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 384 | 768 |

| TMUs | 32 | 24 |

| ROPs | 8 | 16 |

| RT Cores | None | 6 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 24 |

| Pixel Rate | 7.632 GPixel/s | 28.19 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 30.53 GTexel/s | 42.29 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 732.7 GFLOPS | 2.706 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | None listed | 2.706 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 33 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Single-slot |

| Suggested PSU | None listed | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x8 | PCIe 4.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2015-03-12 | 2024-04-15 |

The Verdict

The data paints a clear picture of two GPUs with different intended purposes. The GeForce 920M is a legacy part from 2015, now end-of-life, with performance that places it in the 20th percentile of all GPUs. Its average benchmark score of 3,287 is bolstered by a strong Geekbench OpenCL result of 3,725. For anyone running legacy software that leverages OpenCL compute, the 920M demonstrates a measurable advantage over its nearest rivals, including a 2.4% lead over the GeForce GT 640. Its low 33 W TDP and IGP form factor make it a viable option for extremely power-constrained legacy systems.

The GeForce RTX 4010, released in 2024 and still active, is a different beast entirely. Despite its low 18th percentile ranking, its 3DMark Steel Nomad score of 2,893 places it within 1% of desktop cards like the RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB. This indicates that in a modern DX12 workload, the RTX 4010 punches far above its weight class. It offers 3.7x the FP32 compute of the 920M, 6.67x the memory bandwidth, and introduces ray tracing and tensor core capabilities that the 920M entirely lacks. For any modern gaming, AI-accelerated, or ray-traced workload, the RTX 4010 is the only viable choice. The 920M's higher average score is a quirk of benchmark selection, not a sign of superior capability. Users should choose the RTX 4010 for any current or future software, while the 920M is only relevant for preserving compatibility with very old applications where its OpenCL performance was competitive.