NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M records an average benchmark score of 11261, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M posts an average of 9302. The 780M sits at the 50th percentile among all GPUs, whereas the 850M is at the 46th percentile.

Q: How do the two compare in OpenCL performance?

A: In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 780M scores 12769 versus the GTX 850M's 9821. That is a 30% advantage for the older, larger chip.

Q: Which card wins in Vulkan, and by how much?

A: The GTX 780M wins the Geekbench Vulkan test with a score of 12696 against the GTX 850M's 8782. The delta is 44.6%, the largest gap between the two in any recorded test.

Q: Are there benchmark tests where the GTX 850M comes out ahead?

A: No. Across the two head-to-head tests recorded in the database (OpenCL and Vulkan), the GTX 850M wins zero rounds. The GTX 780M takes both.

Q: What kind of memory does each card use?

A: The GTX 780M uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 160.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The GTX 850M uses 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, with 32.03 GB/s of bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has the lower power draw?

A: The GTX 850M is rated at 45 W TDP, while the GTX 780M is rated at 122 W. The 850M draws substantially less power, which correlates with its integrated form factor.

Architecture Differences

The GTX 780M is built on the GK104 chip using the Kepler architecture. The GTX 850M uses the GM107 chip with the Maxwell architecture. Both are fabricated by TSMC on a 28 nm process, but the resemblance ends there.

The GTX 780M packs 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die, giving a density of 12.0M transistors per mm². The GTX 850M carries 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, with a slightly higher density of 12.6M per mm². The Kepler part is physically much larger and more complex.

Shading unit counts differ dramatically. The GTX 780M has 1536 shading units, 128 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The GTX 850M has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. These figures translate directly into compute and fill-rate capabilities.

Clock behavior varies as well. The GTX 780M lists a base clock of 771 MHz and a boost clock of 797 MHz, with memory running at 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The GTX 850M does not report base or boost clocks in the database; its memory runs at 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective). The memory subsystem is a major differentiator: GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus versus DDR3 on a 128-bit bus.

The GTX 780M is an MXM Module with an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface. The GTX 850M is an IGP with a PCIe 3.0 x16 interface. Both are classified as end-of-life products, and both support DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan, though the 850M lists Vulkan 1.4 while the 780M lists Vulkan 1.2.175.

The GTX 780M belongs to the GeForce 700M generation and succeeds the GeForce 600M line. The GTX 850M belongs to the GeForce 800M generation and succeeds the GeForce 700M line. The 780M was released on May 10, 2013; the 850M followed on March 11, 2014.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two head-to-head comparisons between these GPUs: Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan. The GTX 780M wins both.

In OpenCL, the 780M scores 12769 against the 850M's 9821. The delta is 30%. This is a substantial margin, and it reflects the raw compute advantage of the larger Kepler chip. The 780M's FP32 throughput is 2.448 TFLOPS versus the 850M's 1,154.6 GFLOPS, so the OpenCL result tracks closely with theoretical math.

In Vulkan, the gap widens. The 780M scores 12696, while the 850M scores 8782. That is a 44.6% difference. Vulkan performance can depend heavily on driver overhead and memory bandwidth, and the 780M's 160.0 GB/s versus the 850M's 32.03 GB/s likely plays a role here.

The texture and pixel rates tell a similar story. The GTX 780M achieves 102.0 GTexel/s and 25.50 GPixel/s. The GTX 850M manages 36.08 GTexel/s and 14.43 GPixel/s. These rates are not directly part of the head-to-head tests, but they help explain why the 780M leads in both recorded APIs.

The nearest rivals in the database place each card in context. The GTX 780M's closest competitors include the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3200 (average score 11228, delta 0.3%) and the AMD FirePro W4300 (11225, delta 0.3%). The GTX 850M's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon R7 M380 (9313, delta -0.1%), followed closely by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (9294, delta 0.1%). The two cards do not share a rival, meaning their performance tiers are clearly separated.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The GTX 780M wins both head-to-head tests, with a 30% lead in OpenCL and a 44.6% lead in Vulkan. It also holds the higher average benchmark score (11261 versus 9302), the higher percentile rank (50th versus 46th), and the larger memory subsystem.

The GTX 850M is not without merit. It draws 77 W less power (45 W versus 122 W), uses a smaller die (148 mm² versus 294 mm²), and comes in an IGP form factor rather than an MXM module. For systems that prioritize power efficiency and compact integration, the 850M is the logical choice.

However, for raw performance, the GTX 780M is decisively ahead. Its 1536 shading units, 128 TMUs, and 256-bit GDDR5 memory give it a structural advantage that the Maxwell chip's newer architecture cannot overcome in these tests. The 850M's Maxwell design is more efficient per transistor, but it simply does not have the silicon budget to match the older flagship.

Users who need the highest frame rates and compute scores from a mobile GPU should select the GTX 780M. Users who need a low-power, integrated solution for lighter workloads should select the GTX 850M. The database shows no scenario where the 850M outperforms the 780M.

Specification Differences

| Specification | GTX 780M | GTX 850M |

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

| Architecture | Kepler | Maxwell |

| Chip | GK104 | GM107 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |

| Transistors | 3,540 million | 1,870 million |

| Die Size | 294 mm² | 148 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.0M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 771 MHz | Not reported |

| Boost Clock | 797 MHz | Not reported |

| Memory Clock | 1250 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 160.0 GB/s | 32.03 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1536 | 640 |

| TMUs | 128 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 25.50 GPixel/s | 14.43 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 102.0 GTexel/s | 36.08 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.448 TFLOPS | 1,154.6 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 122 W | 45 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

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

| Vulkan Version | 1.2.175 | 1.4 |

| Release Date | 2013-05-10 | 2014-03-11 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 600M | GeForce 700M |

| Successor | GeForce 800M | GeForce 900M |

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 780M wins in every performance metric recorded in the database. It leads in OpenCL by 30%, in Vulkan by 44.6%, and in average benchmark score by 21.1% (11261 versus 9302). It also wins on memory bandwidth, texture rate, pixel rate, and FP32 compute. For any workload that stresses the GPU, the 780M is the stronger part.

The GTX 850M wins on efficiency and integration. Its 45 W TDP is less than half the 780M's 122 W. It uses a smaller die (148 mm² versus 294 mm²) with fewer transistors (1,870 million versus 3,540 million). It is an IGP, which means it can be soldered directly to the motherboard, whereas the 780M requires an MXM module. For thin-and-light laptops or systems with limited cooling and battery budget, the 850M is the appropriate choice.

The use-case split is clean: performance-oriented laptops should carry the GTX 780M, while power-constrained portable systems should carry the GTX 850M. The database does not record a single benchmark where the 850M overtakes the 780M, so any decision favoring the 850M must be based on power, form factor, or system integration, not on raw score.