GeForce G 105M vs GTS 450 Rev. 2
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 with GeForce G 105M, including specs and performance data.
GTS 450 Rev. 2 outperforms G 105M by a whopping 1575% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 754 | 1452 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.94 | 1.33 |
| Architecture | Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014) | G9x (2007−2010) |
| GPU code name | GF116 | N10M-GE1 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 15 March 2011 (15 years ago) | 8 January 2009 (17 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 192 | 8 |
| Core clock speed | 783 MHz | 640 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,170 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 106 Watt | 14 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 25.06 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.6013 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | no data |
| TMUs | 32 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 256 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | no data |
| Length | 210 mm | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin | no data |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR2, GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 902 MHz | 700 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 57.73 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI | no data |
| HDMI | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 10 |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | no data |
| Vulkan | N/A | - |
| CUDA | 2.1 | - |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14
+0%
|
12−14
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
| Valorant | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 24 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.02 | 0.24 |
| Recency | 15 March 2011 | 8 January 2009 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 106 Watt | 14 Watt |
GTS 450 Rev. 2 has a 1575% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 63% more advanced lithography process.
G 105M, on the other hand, has 657% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce G 105M in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce G 105M is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
