NVIDIA GeForce 930M
NVIDIA graphics card specifications and benchmark scores
At a Glance
NVIDIANVIDIA GeForce 930M Specifications
GeForce 930M GPU Core
Shader units and compute resources
The NVIDIA GeForce 930M GPU core specifications define its raw processing power for graphics and compute workloads. Shading units (also called CUDA cores, stream processors, or execution units depending on manufacturer) handle the parallel calculations required for rendering. TMUs (Texture Mapping Units) process texture data, while ROPs (Render Output Units) handle final pixel output. Higher shader counts generally translate to better GPU benchmark performance, especially in demanding games and 3D applications.
930M Clock Speeds
GPU and memory frequencies
Clock speeds directly impact the GeForce 930M's performance in GPU benchmarks and real-world gaming. The base clock represents the minimum guaranteed frequency, while the boost clock indicates peak performance under optimal thermal conditions. Memory clock speed affects texture loading and frame buffer operations. The GeForce 930M by NVIDIA dynamically adjusts frequencies based on workload, temperature, and power limits to maximize performance while maintaining stability.
NVIDIA's GeForce 930M Memory
VRAM capacity and bandwidth
VRAM (Video RAM) is dedicated memory for storing textures, frame buffers, and shader data. The GeForce 930M's memory capacity determines how well it handles high-resolution textures and multiple displays. Memory bandwidth, measured in GB/s, affects how quickly data moves between the GPU and VRAM. Higher bandwidth improves performance in memory-intensive scenarios like 4K gaming. The memory bus width and type (GDDR6, GDDR6X, HBM) significantly influence overall GPU benchmark scores.
GeForce 930M by NVIDIA Cache
On-chip cache hierarchy
On-chip cache provides ultra-fast data access for the 930M, reducing the need to fetch data from slower VRAM. L1 and L2 caches store frequently accessed data close to the compute units. AMD's Infinity Cache (L3) dramatically increases effective bandwidth, improving GPU benchmark performance without requiring wider memory buses. Larger cache sizes help maintain high frame rates in memory-bound scenarios and reduce power consumption by minimizing VRAM accesses.
930M Theoretical Performance
Compute and fill rates
Theoretical performance metrics provide a baseline for comparing the NVIDIA GeForce 930M against other graphics cards. FP32 (single-precision) performance, measured in TFLOPS, indicates compute capability for gaming and general GPU workloads. FP64 (double-precision) matters for scientific computing. Pixel and texture fill rates determine how quickly the GPU can render complex scenes. While real-world GPU benchmark results depend on many factors, these specifications help predict relative performance levels.
Maxwell Architecture & Process
Manufacturing and design details
The NVIDIA GeForce 930M is built on NVIDIA's Maxwell architecture, which defines how the GPU processes graphics and compute workloads. The manufacturing process node affects power efficiency, thermal characteristics, and maximum clock speeds. Smaller process nodes pack more transistors into the same die area, enabling higher performance per watt. Understanding the architecture helps predict how the 930M will perform in GPU benchmarks compared to previous generations.
NVIDIA's GeForce 930M Power & Thermal
TDP and power requirements
Power specifications for the NVIDIA GeForce 930M determine PSU requirements and thermal management needs. TDP (Thermal Design Power) indicates the heat output under typical loads, guiding cooler selection. Power connector requirements ensure adequate power delivery for stable operation during demanding GPU benchmarks. The suggested PSU wattage accounts for the entire system, not just the graphics card. Efficient power delivery enables the GeForce 930M to maintain boost clocks without throttling.
GeForce 930M by NVIDIA Physical & Connectivity
Dimensions and outputs
Physical dimensions of the NVIDIA GeForce 930M are critical for case compatibility. Card length, height, and slot width determine whether it fits in your chassis. The PCIe interface version affects bandwidth for communication with the CPU. Display outputs define monitor connectivity options, with modern cards supporting multiple high-resolution displays simultaneously. Verify these specifications against your case and motherboard before purchasing to ensure a proper fit.
NVIDIA API Support
Graphics and compute APIs
API support determines which games and applications can fully utilize the NVIDIA GeForce 930M. DirectX 12 Ultimate enables advanced features like ray tracing and variable rate shading. Vulkan provides cross-platform graphics capabilities with low-level hardware access. OpenGL remains important for professional applications and older games. CUDA (NVIDIA) and OpenCL enable GPU compute for video editing, 3D rendering, and scientific applications. Higher API versions unlock newer graphical features in GPU benchmarks and games.
GeForce 930M Product Information
Release and pricing details
The NVIDIA GeForce 930M is manufactured by NVIDIA as part of their graphics card lineup. Release date and launch pricing provide context for comparing GPU benchmark results with competing products from the same era. Understanding the product lifecycle helps evaluate whether the GeForce 930M by NVIDIA represents good value at current market prices. Predecessor and successor information aids in tracking generational improvements and planning future upgrades.
GeForce 930M Benchmark Scores
geekbench_openclSource
Geekbench OpenCL tests GPU compute performance using the cross-platform OpenCL API. This shows how NVIDIA GeForce 930M handles parallel computing tasks like video encoding and scientific simulations. OpenCL is widely supported across different GPU vendors and platforms.
Top 5 Performers
Top 5 PerformersNearby Performers
Nearby Performersgeekbench_vulkanSource
Geekbench Vulkan tests GPU compute using the modern low-overhead Vulkan API. This shows how NVIDIA GeForce 930M performs with next-generation graphics and compute workloads. Vulkan offers better CPU efficiency than older APIs like OpenGL. Modern games and applications increasingly use Vulkan for cross-platform GPU acceleration.
Top 5 Performers
Nearby Performers
About NVIDIA GeForce 930M
The NVIDIA GeForce 930M is a mobile graphics solution built on the Maxwell architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 1,020 million transistors on a 77 mm² die, which yields a transistor density of 13.2 million transistors per square millimeter. The chip, designated GM108S, is positioned within the GeForce 900M generation and is now end-of-life, having been released on 2015-03-12. This analysis examines its benchmark results, power characteristics, memory subsystem, and feature set based exclusively on the provided data.
Benchmark Performance
The GeForce 930M’s average benchmark score stands at 4927, derived from its Geekbench OpenCL score of 5138 and Geekbench Vulkan score of 4715. This places the GPU in the 27th percentile among all GPUs, indicating that it outperforms roughly a quarter of the database’s tracked devices while trailing the majority. The delta between the two API scores is notable: OpenCL results are 423 points higher than Vulkan, suggesting that the hardware’s compute capabilities are more fully utilized under OpenCL workloads, possibly due to driver maturity or API overhead differences in the tested scenarios.
Relative to its nearest rivals, the 930M sits in a tightly contested performance band. Against the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, which averages 4934, the 930M trails by a mere 0.1%. This is a remarkably small margin given the naming hierarchy—the GTX 980M is ostensibly a higher-tier part, yet the average scores indicate near-parity in these specific benchmarks. Similarly, the NVIDIA Quadro K3100M, with an average score of 4937, leads the 930M by only 0.2%. The data suggests that for the workloads captured by Geekbench, the 930M punches above its nominal class position.
The situation flips when comparing to the AMD FirePro W5130M, which scores 4904. Here, the 930M holds a 0.5% advantage, a modest but consistent lead. The narrowest gap is with the NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450, a desktop part from an older generation, which averages 4893. The 930M is 0.7% faster, demonstrating that even a low-power mobile chip can edge out a legacy desktop GPU in these synthetic tests. Across all four rivals, the maximum delta is under one percentage point, meaning the 930M sits at the exact center of a performance cluster where architectural differences translate into negligible real-world distinctions.
Who Should Consider It
Given its 27th percentile standing and the sub-1% deltas against its nearest competitors, the GeForce 930M is suited for users with modest graphical demands rather than enthusiasts seeking high-frame-rate gaming. The benchmark data does not include specific gaming frame rates, but the raw compute figures—421.6 GFLOPS FP32, a texture rate of 13.18 GTexel/s, and a pixel rate of 4.392 GPixel/s—paint a picture of a chip designed for 720p or low-detail 1080p scenarios. At higher resolutions, the 12.80 GB/s memory bandwidth becomes a bottleneck, as detailed in the Memory Subsystem section.
For users who primarily engage with esports titles or older games at reduced settings, the 930M can deliver playable experiences, but the data cautions against expecting smooth performance in modern AAA releases. The Vulkan score of 4715, while lower than OpenCL, still indicates functional API support for developers targeting that interface. The 930M’s position between the GTX 980M and GTS 450 in average scores suggests it occupies a legacy tier—adequate for casual use, media playback, and light productivity, but not for compute-heavy workflows or high-refresh-rate gaming. Users with access to a GTX 980M or Quadro K3100M will see statistically identical performance, so hardware selection among these options should hinge on other factors like driver support or system integration.
Power and Cooling
Thermal and power characteristics are straightforward for the GeForce 930M. The TDP is rated at 33 W, which is modest for a mobile GPU and aligns with its integration as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) slot width. This form factor implies the chip is soldered onto the motherboard rather than being a replaceable MXM module, making cooling solutions laptop-specific and non-user-serviceable. The data does not list a suggested PSU, but given the 33 W TDP, the power draw is low enough that any standard laptop power adapter designed for the host system will suffice—no external power delivery is required.
The power connector field is listed as "None," which reinforces that the 930M draws all its power from the motherboard’s dedicated GPU power circuitry. There are no auxiliary 6-pin or 8-pin connectors to manage, simplifying system integration. The PCIe 3.0 x8 bus interface is another power-relevant detail: half the lanes of a full x16 slot means lower peak bandwidth to system memory, but for a GPU with 12.80 GB/s of dedicated memory bandwidth, the x8 link is unlikely to be a limiting factor in real workloads. The 28 nm process node, while older, contributes to the manageable thermal envelope; no advanced cooling solutions are implied by the data.
FAQ
Q: What is the average benchmark score of the GeForce 930M?
A: The average benchmark score is 4927, which combines a Geekbench OpenCL result of 5138 and a Geekbench Vulkan result of 4715.
Q: How does the GeForce 930M compare to the GeForce GTX 980M?
A: The GTX 980M has an average score of 4934, which is 0.1% higher than the 930M’s 4927. This difference is negligible in practical terms.
Q: What is the memory configuration of the GeForce 930M?
A: It features 2 GB of DDR3 memory on a 64-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 12.80 GB/s.
Q: What APIs does the GeForce 930M support?
A: The GPU supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, as listed in the fact pack.
Q: What is the TDP of the GeForce 930M?
A: The TDP is 33 W, and it uses no external power connectors, drawing power solely from the motherboard.
Q: Is the GeForce 930M still in production?
A: No, the production status is end-of-life, and it was released on 2015-03-12.
Ray Tracing and Feature Set
The GeForce 930M does not include dedicated ray tracing cores or tensor cores—both fields are null in the data. This means hardware-accelerated ray tracing, as found in newer architectures, is entirely absent. Instead, the chip relies on its 384 shading units, 24 texture mapping units, and 8 ROPs to handle all rendering tasks. The absence of tensor cores also eliminates AI-accelerated features like DLSS from the feature set. For API support, the 930M is capable of DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4, meaning it can run modern graphics APIs but likely at feature levels that correspond to older hardware tiers—DirectX 12 (11_0) suggests a baseline feature level rather than the full DirectX 12 Ultimate feature set.
The Maxwell architecture itself provides certain compute efficiencies, but without ray tracing hardware, any ray-traced effects would have to be computed on the shader units, which would be prohibitively slow given the 421.6 GFLOPS FP32 throughput. The Vulkan 1.4 support is noteworthy, as it indicates the driver stack can handle contemporary low-level API workloads, but the hardware’s raw performance will cap achievable complexity. In essence, the feature set is functional for traditional rasterization but lacks the specialized silicon for next-generation rendering techniques.
Memory Subsystem
The memory subsystem is a critical bottleneck for the GeForce 930M. It comes equipped with 2 GB of DDR3 memory connected via a 64-bit bus, yielding a bandwidth of 12.80 GB/s. This is a low figure by modern standards—the GTX 980M, for comparison, has the same average benchmark score but likely benefits from a wider memory interface in real gaming scenarios. The 64-bit bus width limits the amount of data that can be transferred per clock cycle, and the DDR3 type, operating at 800 MHz (1600 Mbps effective), further constrains throughput.
For high-resolution gaming, this bandwidth is insufficient. At 1080p and above, texture streaming and frame buffer operations demand far more than 12.80 GB/s, leading to potential stuttering or reduced texture quality as the GPU waits for data. The 2 GB capacity is also modest—modern games often exceed this at high detail settings, causing the GPU to spill into system memory over the PCIe 3.0 x8 link, which is slower than dedicated VRAM. The pixel rate of 4.392 GPixel/s and texture rate of 13.18 GTexel/s align with this memory constraint, indicating that the GPU’s compute units are not the primary limitation; rather, feeding them data is. Users targeting 720p or low-detail 1080p will find the memory sufficient, but the 12.80 GB/s figure serves as a hard ceiling for any performance scaling at higher resolutions.
How It Compares
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M: The GTX 980M posts an average score of 4934, which is 0.1% higher than the 930M. Despite the significant naming gap, the benchmark data shows these two GPUs performing essentially identically in Geekbench workloads. This suggests that the 930M’s lower power envelope and reduced memory bandwidth do not translate into meaningful compute disadvantages in these synthetic tests, though gaming performance would likely diverge.
NVIDIA Quadro K3100M: The Quadro K3100M averages 4937, leading the 930M by 0.2%. As a professional-grade part, the K3100M may offer better driver validation for CAD or scientific workloads, but the raw scores indicate the 930M is within striking distance. The 0.2% delta is statistically insignificant, making the choice between them dependent on software certification rather than performance.
AMD FirePro W5130M: The FirePro W5130M scores 4904, which is 0.5% lower than the 930M. This is the largest margin in the rival group, yet still under one percentage point. AMD’s mobile workstation card is the closest competitor in terms of positioning, but the NVIDIA part holds a slight edge in these benchmarks, possibly due to driver optimizations for OpenCL.
NVIDIA GeForce GTS 450: A desktop GPU from an older generation, the GTS 450 averages 4893, trailing the 930M by 0.7%. This comparison is notable because the GTS 450 is a discrete desktop card with presumably higher power draw, yet the mobile 930M outperforms it in Geekbench. The 0.7% delta reinforces that the 930M, despite its modest specifications, delivers competitive compute throughput for its class.
The AMD Equivalent of GeForce 930M
Looking for a similar graphics card from AMD? The AMD Radeon RX 480 offers comparable performance and features in the AMD lineup.
Popular NVIDIA GeForce 930M Comparisons
See how the GeForce 930M stacks up against similar graphics cards from the same generation and competing brands.
Compare GeForce 930M with Other GPUs
Select another GPU to compare specifications and benchmarks side-by-side.
Browse GPUs