GPU Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation and the NVIDIA GeForce 920M represent two entirely different eras of mobile graphics. The RTX 5000 is a professional-grade, current-generation powerhouse built on a 5 nm process, while the 920M is an entry-level, end-of-life part from the Kepler 2.0 architecture. Benchmark data shows a massive chasm in compute potential, though the 920M holds a slight edge in one specific synthetic test. This analysis breaks down the head-to-head results, architectural gaps, and use-case scenarios based strictly on the provided data.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The direct benchmark comparison between these two GPUs is limited by the available testing data. The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation has a single recorded benchmark result: a 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 3596. This result places it in the 21st percentile of all GPUs, meaning it outperforms roughly a fifth of the database. Its nearest rivals are incredibly close, with the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 scoring 3594 (a delta of just 0.1%), the GeForce GT 735M scoring 3616 (delta -0.6%), and the GeForce GTX 1050 scoring 3629 (delta -0.9%). This clustering suggests that in this specific DX12 workload, the RTX 5000's performance is effectively on par with those older desktop parts, despite its modern architecture.

The GeForce 920M, conversely, has no 3DMark Steel Nomad result. Instead, its performance is captured through Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 920M scores 3725, and in Geekbench Vulkan, it scores 2849. Its average benchmark score across these tests is 3287, which places it in the 20th percentile of all GPUs, nearly identical to the RTX 5000's percentile ranking. The 920M's nearest rivals include the GeForce GT 730M (avg score 3316, delta -0.9%), the Intel HD Graphics 530 (avg score 3332, delta -1.4%), and the GeForce GT 640 (avg score 3210, delta 2.4%).

The lack of overlapping test data makes a direct apples-to-apples comparison impossible. However, the percentile rankings are telling: both GPUs sit at the 21st and 20th percentiles, respectively. This indicates that while the RTX 5000 has vastly superior theoretical specifications, its measured performance in the 3DMark Steel Nomad test does not place it in a different performance tier than the 920M's Geekbench scores suggest. The RTX 5000's raw compute advantage is not reflected in these particular scores, likely due to the different workloads and software optimizations between the tests. The 920M's Geekbench OpenCL score of 3725 is actually higher than the RTX 5000's Steel Nomad score of 3596, but these are entirely different metrics and cannot be directly compared.

FAQ

Q: How does the RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation's benchmark score compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The RTX 5000 scores 3596 in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12. It is effectively tied with the GeForce GT 545 (delta 0.1%), and it trails the GeForce GT 735M by -0.6% and the GeForce GTX 1050 by -0.9%.

Q: What is the GeForce 920M's best benchmark result?

A: The 920M's highest recorded score is 3725 in Geekbench OpenCL. Its Vulkan score is lower at 2849, resulting in an average benchmark score of 3287.

Q: Which GPU has a higher percentile ranking among all GPUs?

A: The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation ranks in the 21st percentile, while the GeForce 920M ranks in the 20th percentile. The difference is minimal, with the RTX 5000 holding a one-percentile advantage.

Q: Are there any head-to-head benchmarks where both GPUs were tested?

A: No. The head-to-head benchmark list is empty. The RTX 5000 has data only for 3DMark Steel Nomad, while the 920M has data only for Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan.

Q: Does the GeForce 920M outperform the RTX 5000 in any way based on the data?

A: In terms of raw score, the 920M's Geekbench OpenCL result of 3725 is numerically higher than the RTX 5000's 3596 Steel Nomad score. However, these are different tests, so this does not constitute a direct performance win.

Q: What does the deltaPct value for the RTX 5000's rival, the AMD Radeon HD 6770, indicate?

A: The deltaPct of -1.5% indicates that the RTX 5000's score of 3596 is 1.5% lower than the HD 6770's average score of 3649 in the same 3DMark Steel Nomad test.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is generational. The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation is built on the Ada Lovelace architecture, utilizing the AD103 chip manufactured on a 5 nm process at TSMC. It packs 45,900 million transistors into a 379 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 121.1M / mm². This modern design includes 76 ray tracing cores and 304 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI features. Its FP16 performance matches its FP32 at 41.15 TFLOPS, indicating a 1:1 ratio.

The GeForce 920M, in stark contrast, is based on the much older Kepler 2.0 architecture with the GK208B chip. It uses a 28 nm process, also from TSMC, and integrates a mere 1,020 million transistors on an 87 mm² die, resulting in a density of just 11.7M / mm². It has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores. Its FP16 throughput is listed as null, indicating it lacks dedicated half-precision compute capabilities. The RTX 5000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the 920M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets reveal a comprehensive divergence. The RTX 5000 has a base clock of 1425 MHz and a boost clock of 2115 MHz, while the 920M operates at a static 954 MHz for both base and boost. Memory configurations are worlds apart: the RTX 5000 has 16 GB of GDDR6 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 576.0 GB/s of bandwidth, whereas the 920M has 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus, providing only 14.40 GB/s.

Compute resources show similar disparity. The RTX 5000 features 9728 shading units, 304 TMUs, and 112 ROPs. The 920M has just 384 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Pixel and texture rates follow suit: the RTX 5000 achieves 236.9 GPixel/s and 643.0 GTexel/s, while the 920M manages 7.632 GPixel/s and 30.53 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 41.15 TFLOPS for the RTX 5000 versus 732.7 GFLOPS for the 920M, a difference of over 56x.

Power and connectivity also differ. The RTX 5000 has a TDP of 120 W, while the 920M consumes just 33 W. Both use an IGP slot width and have no power connectors. The bus interface is PCIe 4.0 x16 for the RTX 5000, while the 920M uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The RTX 5000 is an Active production part released on 2023-03-20, whereas the 920M is End-of-life and was released on 2015-03-12. Predecessors and successors also differ: the RTX 5000 succeeds Ampere-MW and precedes Blackwell-MW, while the 920M follows GeForce 800M and precedes GeForce 10 Mobile.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation is the clear winner in nearly every measurable specification. Its 41.15 TFLOPS of FP32 compute dwarfs the 920M's 732.7 GFLOPS. With 16 GB of memory bandwidth at 576.0 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s, the RTX 5000 is suited for large datasets, high-resolution textures, and compute-heavy workloads. Its support for DirectX 12 Ultimate, ray tracing cores, and tensor cores makes it viable for modern AAA gaming, 3D rendering, and AI-assisted workflows. The data indicates it is a professional-grade mobile solution designed for demanding tasks, despite its modest 21st percentile ranking in the specific Steel Nomad test.

The GeForce 920M, on the other hand, is an entry-level legacy part. Its strengths lie in its extremely low 33 W TDP and its historical availability. It is not designed for modern gaming or compute; its 2 GB of DDR3 memory and 64-bit bus severely limit its bandwidth. The 920M's nearest rivals, such as the Intel HD Graphics 530, suggest it competes with integrated graphics solutions rather than discrete performance parts. Its higher Geekbench OpenCL score of 3725 compared to its Vulkan score of 2849 indicates it may handle certain OpenCL compute tasks adequately, but it lacks the architectural features for modern API support.

In practical use cases, the RTX 5000 is the only option for professionals requiring portable high-performance computing, such as CAD, video editing, or machine learning inference. The 920M is relegated to basic display output, legacy software, or very light 2D workloads. The benchmark data, while from disparate tests, places both in similar low percentiles, but the RTX 5000's specification sheet makes it the overwhelmingly superior hardware for any modern task. The 920M's only "win" is its dramatically lower power consumption, making it suitable for fanless or ultra-low-power designs, a niche the RTX 5000 cannot fill with its 120 W TDP.