NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M vs NVIDIA Quadro M2000M Comparison

The NVIDIA Quadro M2000M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M are both built on the same GM107 chip and Maxwell architecture, yet they serve distinctly different purposes. Benchmark results show the Quadro M2000M winning both head-to-head tests, with its largest advantage coming in Vulkan performance where it leads by 9.4%. The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy, but the GTX 850M remains a competent option in its own right, sitting just one percentile below its professional counterpart.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Quadro M2000M takes a clean sweep in direct comparisons, winning both available tests. In Geekbench OpenCL, the professional card scores 10057 against the GTX 850M's 9821, a 2.4% margin. This is a modest but consistent lead, placing the M2000M slightly ahead in compute workloads that leverage OpenCL acceleration. The gap widens considerably in Geekbench Vulkan, where the M2000M posts 9606 versus 8782 for the GTX 850M — a 9.4% difference that represents the most significant performance gap between the two.

The Vulkan result is particularly telling. While the OpenCL test shows only a narrow advantage, the Vulkan delta suggests the Quadro's driver optimization or memory configuration provides a more substantial benefit in modern graphics API workloads. The GTX 850M's DDR3 memory, running at 2 Gbps effective with 32.03 GB/s bandwidth, likely contributes to this larger deficit compared to the M2000M's GDDR5 at 5 Gbps effective and 80.19 GB/s bandwidth.

Looking at broader context, the M2000M's average benchmark score of 9832 places it at the 47th percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Quadro 6000 (avg 9846, delta -0.1%), AMD FirePro W5000 (avg 9803, delta 0.3%), and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 (avg 9780, delta 0.5%). This puts the M2000M in a tight cluster where it trades blows with much larger desktop cards. The GTX 850M, with an average score of 9302, sits at the 46th percentile, surrounded by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (avg 9294, delta 0.1%) and AMD Radeon R7 M380 (avg 9313, delta -0.1%). These rival comparisons show the GTX 850M holding its own against older desktop solutions despite being a mobile IGP part.

Architecture Differences

Both GPUs share fundamental architecture traits: the GM107 chip, 28 nm process node from TSMC, 1,870 million transistors, and a 148 mm² die size. Transistor density is identical at 12.6M per mm². The shading unit count matches at 640, with 40 texture mapping units and 16 raster output units on both cards. DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4 API support are also identical across the pair.

The critical divergence appears in memory subsystem and clock behavior. The M2000M uses 4 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, achieving 80.19 GB/s bandwidth with memory clocked at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective). The GTX 850M ships with 2 GB of DDR3 on the same 128-bit bus, but bandwidth drops to 32.03 GB/s with memory at 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective). This 2.5x bandwidth advantage for the Quadro explains much of its performance lead in memory-intensive workloads.

Clock speeds also differ significantly. The M2000M has defined base and boost clocks of 1098 MHz and 1137 MHz respectively, while the GTX 850M lists no base or boost clock values in the data. This clock advantage translates directly to higher throughput rates: the M2000M delivers 18.19 GPixel/s pixel rate and 45.48 GTexel/s texture rate, versus the GTX 850M's 14.43 GPixel/s and 36.08 GTexel/s. FP32 compute scales accordingly, with the M2000M reaching 1,455.4 GFLOPS against the GTX 850M's 1,154.6 GFLOPS.

Form factor and interface provide further separation. The M2000M uses an MXM Module slot with MXM-A (3.0) bus interface, while the GTX 850M is an IGP with PCIe 3.0 x16. Both require no power connectors and are marked end-of-life. The M2000M draws 55 W TDP versus 45 W for the GTX 850M — a 10 W difference that reflects its higher clocks and faster memory. Release timing also differs, with the M2000M arriving on 2015-12-02 and the GTX 850M on 2014-03-11.

Where Each One Wins

The M2000M wins decisively in both benchmark categories, but the nature of its victories suggests distinct use cases. In OpenCL, its 2.4% lead indicates suitability for compute tasks where the extra memory bandwidth and higher clocks provide incremental gains. The 4 GB frame buffer doubles the GTX 850M's capacity, making the M2000M better suited for workloads with larger datasets or higher-resolution textures. Professional applications that demand Vulkan performance will see the most benefit, given the 9.4% advantage in that test.

The GTX 850M, despite losing both tests, remains viable for lighter workloads. Its 45 W TDP makes it more power-efficient, and its IGP form factor means it can be integrated into thinner notebooks without dedicated MXM cooling solutions. The 2 GB DDR3 memory is adequate for older games or less demanding productivity tasks, and its average score of 9302 still places it within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 and 0.3% of the GTX 960 — desktop cards from previous generations. Users who prioritize battery life over raw performance may find the GTX 850M acceptable, though the data shows clear compromises in bandwidth and compute throughput.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher raw compute performance?

A: The Quadro M2000M delivers 1,455.4 GFLOPS FP32 performance, which is 300.8 GFLOPS higher than the GTX 850M's 1,154.6 GFLOPS. This represents a 26% advantage for the professional card.

Q: Is the memory type a significant differentiator?

A: Yes. The M2000M uses GDDR5 with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 850M uses DDR3 with 32.03 GB/s. The Quadro's bandwidth is 2.5 times higher, which directly impacts memory-heavy workloads.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The M2000M averages 9832 across benchmarks, placing it at the 47th percentile. The GTX 850M averages 9302 at the 46th percentile. The M2000M's average is 530 points higher, a 5.7% overall advantage.

Q: Can the GTX 850M compete in Vulkan performance?

A: No. The M2000M scores 9606 in Geekbench Vulkan against the GTX 850M's 8782, a 9.4% gap. This is the largest single-test difference between the two cards.

Q: Are there any architectural features unique to one card?

A: Both cards share the same GM107 chip, 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. The differences are confined to memory configuration, clocks, and form factor — not core architecture.

Q: Which card has a lower power draw?

A: The GTX 850M has a 45 W TDP, which is 10 W lower than the M2000M's 55 W. This makes the GTX 850M more suited for power-constrained mobile designs.

The Verdict

The data presents a straightforward conclusion: the Quadro M2000M outperforms the GTX 850M in every measured benchmark. Its 2.4% OpenCL lead and 9.4% Vulkan lead are consistent with its hardware advantages — higher clocks, doubled memory capacity, and 2.5x bandwidth. The M2000M's 47th percentile ranking versus the GTX 850M's 46th confirms this hierarchy, though both sit close in the overall GPU landscape.

Users requiring professional-grade performance should choose the M2000M. The 4 GB GDDR5 frame buffer and 80.19 GB/s bandwidth provide headroom for demanding applications, while the MXM form factor allows for modular upgrades in compatible systems. The 55 W TDP is a reasonable trade-off for the 26% FP32 compute advantage and significantly better Vulkan results. This card is positioned for users who need consistent, verified performance in compute and rendering workloads where memory bandwidth is critical.

The GTX 850M serves a different audience. Its 45 W TDP and IGP design make it ideal for slim, power-efficient laptops where dedicated graphics must coexist with long battery life. The 2 GB DDR3 memory is sufficient for casual gaming and everyday productivity, and its 46th percentile standing means it will handle most mainstream tasks without issue. However, the 32.03 GB/s bandwidth and lower clocks create a hard ceiling for demanding applications. Users who prioritize portability and efficiency over raw performance should consider this card, but those who need serious compute capability should look to the M2000M or newer alternatives.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA Quadro M2000M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M |

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

| Generation | Quadro Maxwell-M (Mx000M) | GeForce 800M |

| Base Clock | 1098 MHz | Not specified |

| Boost Clock | 1137 MHz | Not specified |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) | 1001 MHz (2 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 80.19 GB/s | 32.03 GB/s |

| Pixel Rate | 18.19 GPixel/s | 14.43 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 45.48 GTexel/s | 36.08 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1,455.4 GFLOPS | 1,154.6 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 55 W | 45 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

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

| Release Date | 2015-12-02 | 2014-03-11 |

| Predecessor | Quadro Kepler-M | GeForce 700M |

| Successor | Quadro Pascal-M | GeForce 900M |