NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data covers two compute workloads for these GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. In both tests, the older desktop-oriented NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 takes the lead over the mobile NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M.

In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 670 scores 15,341 against the GTX 965M's 14,509. That is a 5.4% advantage for the GTX 670, which is a meaningful gap in raw compute throughput. The margin is not overwhelming, but it is consistent and shows that the desktop card's higher shading unit count and wider memory bus translate into real performance gains in this workload.

The Vulkan test shows a larger separation. The GTX 670 posts 15,553 while the GTX 965M reaches 14,299. The 8.1% delta in favor of the GTX 670 indicates that the Kepler architecture's advantage grows under API-level compute and graphics workloads that leverage lower-level hardware access. The GTX 965M does close some of the gap in OpenCL, where its newer Maxwell 2.0 architecture has better optimization for that specific API, but it still trails.

Looking at the aggregate average benchmark score, the GTX 670 lands at 12,773 across all its recorded tests, while the GTX 965M averages 14,404. This is an interesting inversion: the GTX 965M has a higher average because it lacks the GTX 670's weaker Metal benchmark result, which pulls the desktop card's overall average down. The GTX 670's Metal score is only 7,424, dragging its composite average below the mobile part's two-test average. The head-to-head data, however, only includes OpenCL and Vulkan, where the GTX 670 wins both.

For context on where these cards sit in the broader database, the GTX 965M holds a 56th percentile ranking across all GPUs, while the GTX 670 sits at the 52nd percentile. Despite the GTX 670 winning both direct comparisons, the GTX 965M's higher percentile reflects its stronger average score from a smaller benchmark set. The nearest rivals for the GTX 965M include the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 at 14,385 (0.1% behind), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN at 14,373 (0.2% behind), and the AMD Radeon Vega 11 at 14,352 (0.4% behind). The GTX 670's nearest rivals are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 at 12,830 (0.4% ahead), the AMD Radeon Pro 455 at 12,831 (0.4% ahead), and the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT at 12,710 (0.5% behind).

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different architectural generations from NVIDIA. The GTX 965M is built on Maxwell 2.0 with the GM204 chip, while the GTX 670 uses the Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the transistor budgets differ substantially.

The GTX 965M packs 5,200 million transistors into a 398 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.1 million per square millimeter. The GTX 670 has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, with a density of 12.0 million per square millimeter. The Maxwell chip is physically larger and more transistor-dense, reflecting its later design period and architectural changes.

Clock speeds are similar at the base level: the GTX 965M runs at 924 MHz base and 950 MHz boost, while the GTX 670 runs at 915 MHz base and 980 MHz boost. The GTX 670 has a slightly higher boost clock, which contributes to its performance edge in sustained workloads.

Memory configuration is a major differentiator. The GTX 965M uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128 bit bus, delivering 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 670 also has 2 GB of GDDR5 but on a 256 bit bus, giving it 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth, more than double the mobile part. The effective memory clock is 5 Gbps for the GTX 965M and 6 Gbps for the GTX 670, so the bandwidth advantage comes primarily from the wider bus.

Compute resources favor the GTX 670 in raw counts. It has 1,344 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 965M has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This gives the GTX 670 a 31.3% advantage in shading units and a 75% advantage in texture units, explaining its higher texture fill rate of 109.8 GTexel/s versus 60.80 GTexel/s for the GTX 965M. Pixel rates are closer: 27.44 GPixel/s for the GTX 670 and 30.40 GPixel/s for the GTX 965M, with the mobile part taking a slight lead due to its higher clock-to-ROP ratio.

Floating point performance tells a similar story. The GTX 670 delivers 2.634 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the GTX 965M reaches 1.946 TFLOPS. That is a 35.4% advantage for the desktop card, which aligns with its larger shading unit count despite the similar clock speeds.

API support shows the newer architecture's advantage. The GTX 965M supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 670 supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both support OpenGL 4.6. This means the GTX 965M can access newer feature levels in DirectX 12 and a more recent Vulkan version, which may matter for specific workloads that rely on those API extensions.

Form factor and power delivery are entirely different. The GTX 965M is an MXM Module with no power connectors and no published TDP, designed for laptops where power and space are constrained. The GTX 670 is a dual-slot desktop card measuring 241 mm in length, 111 mm in height, and 38 mm in width, requiring two 6-pin power connectors and a suggested 450 W power supply. Its TDP is listed at 170 W, a figure that the mobile part does not report.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 scores 15,341 versus 14,509 for the GTX 965M, a 5.4% advantage for the desktop card.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 670 scores 15,553 while the GTX 965M reaches 14,299, giving the GTX 670 an 8.1% lead.

Q: Does the GTX 965M have a higher average benchmark score?

A: Yes. The GTX 965M averages 14,404 across its two recorded tests, while the GTX 670 averages 12,773 across three tests. The GTX 670's low Metal score of 7,424 pulls its average down.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The GTX 670 provides 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth on a 256 bit bus, while the GTX 965M provides 80.19 GB/s on a 128 bit bus. The desktop card has more than double the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The GTX 670 has 1,344 shading units, compared to 1,024 for the GTX 965M, a 31.3% advantage for the desktop card.

Q: What are the DirectX feature level differences?

A: The GTX 965M supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 670 supports DirectX 12 (11_0). The mobile part has a higher feature level.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Kepler |

| Chip | GM204 | GK104 |

| Generation | GeForce 900M | GeForce 600 |

| Transistors | 5,200 million | 3,540 million |

| Die Size | 398 mm² | 294 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.1M / mm² | 12.0M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 924 MHz | 915 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 950 MHz | 980 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 5 Gbps effective | 6 Gbps effective |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 256 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 80.19 GB/s | 192.3 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 1344 |

| Texture Mapping Units | 64 | 112 |

| Pixel Rate | 30.40 GPixel/s | 27.44 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 60.80 GTexel/s | 109.8 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Compute | 1.946 TFLOPS | 2.634 TFLOPS |

| TDP | Not listed | 170 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 2x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not listed | 450 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| Vulkan Version | 1.4 | 1.2.175 |

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

| Dimensions | Not listed | 241 mm x 111 mm x 38 mm |

| Release Date | 2015-01-08 | 2012-05-09 |

| Launch MSRP | Not listed | 399 USD |

The Verdict

The data presents a clear picture: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 outperforms the GTX 965M in both recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The desktop card wins OpenCL by 5.4% and Vulkan by 8.1%, driven by its higher shading unit count, wider memory bus, and greater FP32 throughput. The GTX 670's 2.634 TFLOPS versus 1.946 TFLOPS for the GTX 965M is the fundamental compute advantage, and its 192.3 GB/s bandwidth dwarfs the mobile part's 80.19 GB/s.

However, the GTX 965M is not without merits. It has a higher average benchmark score of 14,404 versus 12,773, a better percentile ranking at 56 versus 52, and a more modern API feature set including DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4. Its pixel rate is also slightly higher at 30.40 GPixel/s versus 27.44 GPixel/s. These factors matter for specific workloads, particularly those that leverage newer API features or where the mobile form factor is required.

For users who need maximum raw compute performance and have a desktop platform, the GTX 670 is the better choice. Its consistent wins in both OpenCL and Vulkan, along with its higher texture rate and shading unit count, make it the stronger card for compute-heavy tasks. The GTX 670's 170 W TDP and dual-slot design are acceptable for a desktop system with a 450 W power supply. The GTX 965M, being an MXM module with no power connectors, is built for laptops and portable devices. Its lower compute throughput is a trade-off for mobility, but its higher average score and better percentile ranking suggest that its software optimization profile is more favorable in the broader database.

The choice depends on the platform. The GTX 670 is the performance leader in direct comparison, but the GTX 965M offers a newer feature set and better average performance in the recorded benchmark suite. Neither card is a clear winner across all metrics; the GTX 670 dominates compute throughput and bandwidth, while the GTX 965M has a higher percentile and more modern API support.