NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690, which wins both recorded tests against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 690 scores 17,399, while the GTX 965M trails at 14,509. That translates to a 19.9% advantage for the desktop card. The Vulkan test tells a similar story, with the GTX 690 posting 16,675 against the GTX 965M's 14,299, a 16.6% lead.

These are not marginal differences. A 19.9% delta in OpenCL places the GTX 690 firmly ahead in compute workloads that leverage general-purpose GPU execution. The Vulkan gap, while slightly narrower at 16.6%, still represents a substantial performance tier separation. The data indicates that in every measured scenario, the GTX 690 outperforms the GTX 965M by a meaningful margin.

Context from the nearest rivals reinforces the positioning. The GTX 690's average benchmark score of 17,037 sits within 0.1% of the AMD Radeon HD 7970M (17,019) and within 0.3% of the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (17,083). The GTX 965M's average of 14,404 is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14,385, a 0.1% delta), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN (14,373, a 0.2% delta), and the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics (14,315, a 0.6% delta). So while the GTX 690 competes with midrange desktop GPUs from a later generation, the GTX 965M aligns with integrated graphics and older flagship parts.

The percentile data places the GTX 690 in the 60th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 965M sits in the 56th percentile. This four-percentile spread, combined with the benchmark deltas, indicates that the GTX 690 occupies a higher performance bracket overall, despite being released earlier.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins in OpenCL performance?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 wins, scoring 17,399 versus 14,509 for the GTX 965M, a 19.9% advantage.

Q: What is the Vulkan performance gap between the two?

A: The GTX 690 scores 16,675, while the GTX 965M scores 14,299. The GTX 690 leads by 16.6%.

Q: How do these GPUs rank against all other GPUs in the database?

A: The GTX 690 falls in the 60th percentile, while the GTX 965M falls in the 56th percentile.

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 690 averages 17,037, compared to the GTX 965M's 14,404.

Q: What is the closest rival to the GTX 690 in the database?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 7970M, with an average score of 17,019 and a delta of 0.1% from the GTX 690.

Q: Which GPU has a higher memory bandwidth?

A: The GTX 690, with 192.3 GB/s, versus the GTX 965M's 80.19 GB/s.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from different NVIDIA architectures, which explains much of their performance divergence. The GTX 690 is built on the Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip, while the GTX 965M uses the Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM204 chip. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the transistor counts differ notably: the GTX 690 packs 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, while the GTX 965M carries 5,200 million transistors on a larger 398 mm² die. The transistor density reflects this, with the GTX 965M at 13.1M transistors per mm² versus the GTX 690's 12.0M per mm².

The Maxwell 2.0 architecture in the GTX 965M supports a newer DirectX feature level: DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 690 only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0). Both support OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan support differs slightly: the GTX 965M supports Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 690 supports Vulkan 1.2.175. These API differences reflect the generational gap, with the GTX 965M being released in 2015, three years after the GTX 690's 2012 debut.

The GTX 690 is a dual-slot desktop card with a 279 mm length, 111 mm height, and 38 mm width. It uses 2x 8-pin power connectors and requires a 700 W suggested power supply. The GTX 965M, by contrast, is an MXM module designed for portable devices, with no dedicated power connectors and a bus interface of MXM-B (3.0). Its display outputs are labeled as "Portable Device Dependent," meaning the actual connectivity depends on the host laptop. The GTX 690 offers 3x DVI and 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2 outputs.

Specification Differences

The recorded data shows several areas where the two GPUs diverge. The GTX 690 has a base clock of 915 MHz and a boost clock of 1019 MHz, while the GTX 965M runs at 924 MHz base and 950 MHz boost. Memory clocks differ as well: the GTX 690 runs at 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), while the GTX 965M runs at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective).

Memory configuration is a significant differentiator. The GTX 690 uses a 256-bit bus width, delivering 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 965M uses a 128-bit bus, which halves the bandwidth to 80.19 GB/s. Both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, but the effective throughput is vastly different.

Compute resources also differ. The GTX 690 has 1,536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 965M has 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. This translates into pixel rates of 32.61 GPixel/s for the GTX 690 versus 30.40 GPixel/s for the GTX 965M, and texture rates of 130.4 GTexel/s versus 60.80 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute throughput is 3.130 TFLOPS for the GTX 690 and 1.946 TFLOPS for the GTX 965M.

Power consumption is another split. The GTX 690 has a TDP of 300 W, while the GTX 965M's TDP is not recorded. The GTX 690 also carries a launch MSRP of 999 USD. The GTX 965M has no recorded launch MSRP. The GTX 690 belongs to the GeForce 600 generation, while the GTX 965M belongs to the GeForce 900M generation. The GTX 690's predecessor is GeForce 500 and its successor is GeForce 700; the GTX 965M's predecessor is GeForce 800M and its successor is GeForce 10 Mobile.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 wins in every recorded benchmark category, but the nature of those wins points to specific use cases. The 19.9% OpenCL advantage suggests that the GTX 690 is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads such as rendering, physics simulation, and data-parallel processing. The 16.6% Vulkan lead indicates that it also performs better in modern graphics APIs, despite its older architecture.

For desktop gaming and workstation use, the GTX 690's dual-slot design, 256-bit memory bus, and 192.3 GB/s bandwidth make it well suited for high-resolution textures and demanding scenes. Its 3.130 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 130.4 GTexel/s texture rate provide a solid foundation for content creation and GPU-accelerated applications. The GTX 690's 60th percentile ranking places it above a majority of GPUs in the database.

The GTX 965M, while trailing in raw numbers, offers a different value proposition in the portable segment. Its MXM module format and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for laptops where space and power are constrained. The 80.19 GB/s bandwidth and 1.946 TFLOPS are sufficient for 1080p gaming at moderate settings, and the newer Maxwell 2.0 architecture brings DirectX 12 (12_1) support, which could matter for older titles that translate well to newer API features. The 56th percentile ranking shows it still outperforms a majority of GPUs, even if it sits below the GTX 690.

The GTX 965M also has a higher transistor density (13.1M per mm²) and a larger die (398 mm²), which suggests the Maxwell architecture is more efficient per transistor, even if the absolute performance is lower. For users who need a GPU in a portable form factor with modern API compatibility, the GTX 965M holds its own. For users who prioritize maximum performance and have the power budget for a 300 W card, the GTX 690 is the clear winner based on the measured data.