NVIDIA GeForce 920MX vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti Comparison

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti than the GeForce 920MX in OpenCL?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti scores 18129 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the 920MX scores 4068. That is a 345.6% advantage for the GTX 1050 Ti, making it more than four times as fast in this compute workload.

Q: Which GPU has the higher transistor count?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti packs 3,300 million transistors on a 132 mm² die, whereas the 920MX has 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die. The GTX 1050 Ti also has a higher transistor density at 25.0M / mm² versus 13.2M / mm².

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 112.1 GB/s bandwidth. The 920MX uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 64-bit bus with 14.40 GB/s bandwidth. The GTX 1050 Ti has nearly eight times the memory bandwidth.

Q: Do both GPUs support DirectX 12?

A: Yes, both support DirectX 12, but with different feature levels. The GTX 1050 Ti supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the 920MX supports DirectX 12 (11_0). Both also support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each GPU?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti has an average benchmark score of 4193, placing it in the 25th percentile of all GPUs. The 920MX has an average score of 3528, placing it in the 21st percentile.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate?

A: The GTX 1050 Ti delivers 44.54 GPixel/s, while the 920MX delivers 7.944 GPixel/s. This means the GTX 1050 Ti can fill pixels over five times faster, which directly impacts rendering resolution and frame rates.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architectures and generations. The GTX 1050 Ti is built on the Pascal architecture using the GP107 chip, part of the GeForce 10-series. It is manufactured on a 14 nm process at Samsung, a significant advancement over the 920MX.

The 920MX uses the Maxwell architecture with the GM108S chip, belonging to the GeForce 900M generation. It is fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This older node explains the lower transistor density: 13.2M / mm² versus 25.0M / mm² on the 1050 Ti.

The GTX 1050 Ti has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The 920MX has 256 shading units, 24 TMUs, and only 8 ROPs. These differences are structural, not just clock-related. The GTX 1050 Ti also has a much larger die at 132 mm² versus 77 mm².

Clock speeds differ notably. The GTX 1050 Ti runs at a 1291 MHz base clock and 1392 MHz boost clock. The 920MX runs at 965 MHz base and 993 MHz boost. Combined with more cores, the GTX 1050 Ti achieves 2.138 TFLOPS FP32 performance, while the 920MX manages 508.4 GFLOPS.

The GTX 1050 Ti uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface, while the 920MX uses PCIe 3.0 x8. The 920MX is designed as an MXM module for portable devices, while the 1050 Ti is a dual-slot card with DVI, HDMI 2.0, and DisplayPort 1.4a outputs. The 920MX's display outputs are listed as "Portable Device Dependent."

Memory technology is another major divider. The 1050 Ti uses GDDR5 at 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) with a 128-bit bus. The 920MX uses DDR3 at 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective) with a 64-bit bus. This explains the bandwidth gap: 112.1 GB/s versus 14.40 GB/s.

Power consumption tells a different story. The 920MX has a 16 W TDP, while the 1050 Ti has a 75 W TDP. Neither requires power connectors, but the 1050 Ti suggests a 250 W PSU. The 920MX has no suggested PSU listed, reflecting its mobile, low-power design.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 1050 Ti wins in every head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database. It is decisively ahead in both Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan tests. This makes it the clear choice for graphics-intensive tasks, compute workloads, and modern API-based applications.

The 920MX wins in the practical category of power efficiency. At 16 W TDP, it draws far less power than the 1050 Ti's 75 W. This makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops and other portable devices where battery life and thermal limits are primary concerns.

The 920MX also wins on integration simplicity. As an MXM module with portable-device-dependent outputs, it is designed for embedded or mobile systems. The 1050 Ti is a standalone dual-slot card requiring PCIe x16 slot space and a 250 W PSU recommendation.

For gaming, the 1050 Ti's higher pixel rate (44.54 GPixel/s vs 7.944 GPixel/s) and texture rate (66.82 GTexel/s vs 23.83 GTexel/s) give it a commanding lead. The 920MX can handle light or older titles, but the data does not support it for demanding modern games.

For compute tasks like OpenCL-based acceleration, the 1050 Ti's 345.6% lead in Geekbench OpenCL means it processes data significantly faster. The 920MX's 508.4 GFLOPS FP32 throughput is a fraction of the 1050 Ti's 2.138 TFLOPS.

The 920MX wins on release timing for mobile platforms, debuting in March 2016, seven months before the 1050 Ti's October 2016 launch. This earlier availability mattered for laptop manufacturers at the time.

Specification Differences

The recorded data shows the following differences between the two GPUs:

• Process node: 14 nm (Samsung) vs 28 nm (TSMC)
• Transistors: 3,300 million vs 1,020 million
• Die size: 132 mm² vs 77 mm²
• Transistor density: 25.0M / mm² vs 13.2M / mm²
• Base clock: 1291 MHz vs 965 MHz
• Boost clock: 1392 MHz vs 993 MHz
• Memory clock: 1752 MHz (7 Gbps effective) vs 900 MHz (1800 Mbps effective)
• Memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
• Memory type: GDDR5 vs DDR3
• Memory bus: 128 bit vs 64 bit
• Memory bandwidth: 112.1 GB/s vs 14.40 GB/s
• Shading units: 768 vs 256
• TMUs: 48 vs 24
• ROPs: 32 vs 8
• Pixel rate: 44.54 GPixel/s vs 7.944 GPixel/s
• Texture rate: 66.82 GTexel/s vs 23.83 GTexel/s
• FP32: 2.138 TFLOPS vs 508.4 GFLOPS
• TDP: 75 W vs 16 W
• Slot width: Dual-slot vs MXM Module
• Bus interface: PCIe 3.0 x16 vs PCIe 3.0 x8
• Display outputs: 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a vs Portable Device Dependent
• DirectX support: 12 (12_1) vs 12 (11_0)
• Release date: 2016-10-24 vs 2016-03-24
• Predecessor: GeForce 900 vs GeForce 800M
• Successor: GeForce 20 vs GeForce 10 Mobile

The 920MX has no launch MSRP in the database. The GTX 1050 Ti lists a launch MSRP of 139 USD.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains two direct benchmark comparisons between these GPUs. Both show a decisive victory for the GTX 1050 Ti.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 1050 Ti scores 18129 against the 920MX's 4068. This is a 345.6% delta in favor of the 1050 Ti. Such a large margin indicates the 1050 Ti handles compute shaders and parallel workloads far more effectively. The 920MX's Maxwell architecture with 256 shading units simply cannot match the 768 shading units of the Pascal-based 1050 Ti.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 1050 Ti scores 10001 against the 920MX's 2987. The delta here is 234.8%. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that benefits from raw throughput and memory bandwidth. The 1050 Ti's 112.1 GB/s bandwidth versus 14.40 GB/s gives it a massive advantage in feeding data to the GPU cores.

The wins tally is 2 for the GTX 1050 Ti and 0 for the 920MX. No benchmark in the database shows the 920MX ahead.

These results align with the percentile rankings. The GTX 1050 Ti sits at the 25th percentile of all GPUs, while the 920MX sits at the 21st percentile. The average benchmark scores of 4193 versus 3528 show a 18.9% overall gap.

The nearest rivals for the GTX 1050 Ti include the AMD Radeon R5 M330 (4170 avg, 0.6% delta) and the NVIDIA Quadro K2100M (4151 avg, 1% delta). The 920MX's nearest rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GT 545 (3594 avg, -1.8% delta) and the NVIDIA RTX 5000 Mobile Ada Generation (3596 avg, -1.9% delta). These comparisons show both GPUs perform in the lower-mid range of the GPU spectrum, but the 1050 Ti sits in a higher bracket.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050 Ti outperforms the NVIDIA GeForce 920MX in every recorded benchmark. The 345.6% lead in OpenCL and 234.8% lead in Vulkan are not marginal improvements; they represent a different performance class entirely.

Users who need graphics performance for gaming, rendering, or compute acceleration should choose the GTX 1050 Ti. Its 4 GB GDDR5 memory, 128-bit bus, and 2.138 TFLOPS FP32 throughput provide a solid foundation for modern workloads. The 25th percentile ranking places it above the 920MX's 21st percentile.

Users who prioritize power efficiency and mobility should consider the 920MX. Its 16 W TDP versus 75 W makes it far more suitable for battery-powered laptops. The MXM form factor and portable-device-dependent outputs indicate this GPU was designed for integration into compact systems, not desktop expansion.

The 920MX's 2 GB DDR3 memory and 14.40 GB/s bandwidth are limiting factors for anything beyond basic 2D tasks or very light 3D acceleration. The 508.4 GFLOPS FP32 rate is suitable for simple compute but will bottleneck on modern applications.

The GTX 1050 Ti's launch MSRP of 139 USD and the 920MX's lack of a listed MSRP suggest different market positions, but the performance gap justifies the 1050 Ti for anyone who can accommodate its power and slot requirements.

In short: for desktop users, the GTX 1050 Ti is the only sensible choice. For mobile users who must stay within a 16 W power envelope, the 920MX is the available option, but its performance ceiling is low. The benchmark data consistently favors the Pascal-based 1050 Ti across both compute and graphics APIs.