NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M Comparison

# NVIDIA GeForce GTX 765M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M

The GeForce GTX 765M and GTX 760M are two Kepler-based mobile GPUs from the same GeForce 700M generation, released on the same day and built on the same 28 nm TSMC process. The GTX 765M is the faster part across all shared benchmark tests, winning both head-to-head comparisons with substantial margins, while the GTX 760M offers a lower 55 W TDP that may appeal to thinner notebooks. The 765M delivers 28.1% higher OpenCL performance and 37.9% higher Vulkan performance, but the 760M consumes 20 W less power, making the choice between them a trade-off of raw compute versus thermal headroom.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance winner: the GTX 765M beats the GTX 760M in every benchmark where both were tested. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 765M scores 7176 against 5604 for the 760M, a 28.1% advantage. In Geekbench Vulkan, the gap widens to 37.9%, with the 765M posting 6714 versus 4868. The 765M also has a higher average benchmark score of 5501 compared to 5236 for the 760M, and it sits in the 32nd percentile of all GPUs versus the 31st percentile for the 760M.

However, the 760M is not without its own draw. Its 55 W TDP is significantly lower than the 765M's 75 W, a 20 W difference that can matter in slim laptop chassis where cooling is constrained. For users prioritizing maximum frame rates in compute-heavy tasks or Vulkan-based games, the 765M is the obvious pick. For users who need a more power-efficient mobile GPU and are willing to accept roughly 22% lower average performance, the 760M remains a viable option. The 765M's nearest rival, the GeForce MX130, scores nearly identically at 5508 with a delta of -0.1%, while the 760M's closest competitor is the GTX 980M at 5308 with a delta of -1.3%, indicating the 760M is slightly behind its nearest rival while the 765M is essentially tied with its own.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share the same Kepler architecture and are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The transistor count is identical at 2,540 million on a 221 mm² die, yielding the same transistor density of 11.5M per mm². The core configurations are also identical: 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation pipelines. Neither GPU includes ray tracing or tensor cores.

The key architectural difference lies in the chip designation and the bus interface. The 765M uses the GK106 chip, while the 760M uses the GK106S variant. The 765M is connected via an MXM-B (3.0) interface, whereas the 760M uses a standard PCIe 3.0 x16 connection. This suggests the 765M is designed for modular MXM upgrades in larger laptops, while the 760M may be soldered directly to motherboards or used in more compact designs. Both share the same memory subsystem: 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, yielding identical 64.13 GB/s bandwidth and 1002 MHz memory clock (4 Gbps effective).

The clock speeds differ substantially. The 765M runs at a 797 MHz base clock and 863 MHz boost, while the 760M operates at 628 MHz base and 719 MHz boost. This 169 MHz base and 144 MHz boost advantage for the 765M directly translates into higher fill rates and compute throughput. The 765M achieves 13.81 GPixel/s pixel rate and 55.23 GTexel/s texture rate, versus 11.50 GPixel/s and 46.02 GTexel/s for the 760M. FP32 performance is 1,325.6 GFLOPS for the 765M against 1,104.4 GFLOPS for the 760M, a difference of roughly 20%.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Geekbench OpenCL test shows the 765M at 7176 versus 5604 for the 760M, a 28.1% margin. This is a substantial gap that reflects the 765M's higher clock speeds and resulting compute throughput. The 765M's FP32 output of 1,325.6 GFLOPS versus 1,104.4 GFLOPS for the 760M explains much of this difference, as OpenCL workloads tend to scale with raw shader performance.

In Geekbench Vulkan, the 765M scores 6714 against 4868 for the 760M, an even larger 37.9% advantage. Vulkan's lower overhead and more direct hardware access likely amplifies the clock speed differences between the two GPUs. The 765M's 863 MHz boost clock versus 719 MHz for the 760M gives it a significant edge in latency-sensitive workloads.

There are no benchmark results where the 760M wins; the head-to-head data shows 2 wins for the 765M and 0 for the 760M. The 765M's average benchmark score of 5501 also exceeds the 760M's 5236 by approximately 5.1%. In terms of nearest rivals, the 765M is essentially tied with the MX130 (5508, -0.1%) and slightly ahead of the Radeon R7 M440 (5483, 0.3%). The 760M, meanwhile, is slightly behind the GTX 980M (5308, -1.3%) and the GeForce 940M (5284, -0.9%), while leading the Quadro 4000M (5211, 0.5%) and the Radeon R7 M260X (5161, 1.5%).

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ in several key specification fields. The chip is different: GK106 for the 765M versus GK106S for the 760M. The base clock is 797 MHz for the 765M and 628 MHz for the 760M. The boost clock is 863 MHz for the 765M and 719 MHz for the 760M. The pixel rate is 13.81 GPixel/s for the 765M versus 11.50 GPixel/s for the 760M. The texture rate is 55.23 GTexel/s versus 46.02 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 1,325.6 GFLOPS versus 1,104.4 GFLOPS. The TDP is 75 W for the 765M and 55 W for the 760M. The bus interface differs: MXM-B (3.0) for the 765M and PCIe 3.0 x16 for the 760M.

All other specification fields are identical. Both GPUs have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.13 GB/s bandwidth. Both have 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. Both use 28 nm process technology from TSMC with 2,540 million transistors on a 221 mm² die. Both are MXM Module slot width with no power connectors, and both have portable device dependent display outputs. Both support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both are end-of-life products released on May 29, 2013, with the same predecessor (GeForce 600M) and successor (GeForce 800M).

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in OpenCL workloads?

A: The GTX 765M is significantly faster, scoring 7176 in Geekbench OpenCL versus 5604 for the GTX 760M, a 28.1% advantage.

Q: How much power does each GPU consume?

A: The GTX 765M has a 75 W TDP, while the GTX 760M has a 55 W TDP, making the 760M more power-efficient by 20 W.

Q: Do both GPUs have the same memory configuration?

A: Yes, both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus with 64.13 GB/s bandwidth and a 1002 MHz memory clock.

Q: Are these GPUs still in production?

A: No, both are end-of-life products released on May 29, 2013, with the GeForce 600M as predecessor and GeForce 800M as successor.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The 765M is essentially tied with the GeForce MX130 (5508, -0.1%) and slightly ahead of the Radeon R7 M440 (5483, 0.3%). The 760M trails the GeForce GTX 980M (5308, -1.3%) and GeForce 940M (5284, -0.9%) but leads the Quadro 4000M (5211, 0.5%).

Q: Which GPU has better Vulkan performance?

A: The GTX 765M wins decisively with a Geekbench Vulkan score of 6714 versus 4868 for the GTX 760M, a 37.9% margin.