GeForce GTX 850M vs 1050 3GB Mobile
Aggregated performance score
1050 3GB Mobile outperforms 850M by an impressive 97% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 364 | 538 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 3.78 |
| Architecture | Pascal (2016−2021) | Maxwell (2014−2018) |
| GPU code name | no data | N15P-GT |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | April 2018 (6 years ago) | 12 March 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Current price | no data | $163 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 768 | 640 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 1366 MHz | Up to 936 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1442 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,870 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 36.08 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 1,155 gflops |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile and GeForce GTX 850M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Bus support | no data | PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| SLI options | 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 | DDR3, GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 MB | 4 GB |
| Standard memory configuration | no data | DDR3 or GDDR5 |
| Memory bus width | 96 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1752 MHz | Up to 2500 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 84 GB/s | 80.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | no data | - |
Connectivity and outputs
Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | No outputs |
| eDP 1.2 signal support | no data | Up to 3840x2160 |
| LVDS signal support | no data | Up to 1920x1200 |
| VGA аnalog display support | no data | Up to 2048x1536 |
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | no data | Up to 3840x2160 |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| HDCP content protection | no data | + |
| G-SYNC support | + | no data |
| 7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI | no data | + |
| TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming | no data | + |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | no data | + |
| Optimus | no data | + |
| Ansel | no data | + |
| Multi-Projection | + | no data |
| Multi Monitor | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | no data | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | + | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | no data | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
1050 3GB Mobile outperforms 850M by 97% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
1050 3GB Mobile outperforms 850M by 107% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| 900p | 160−170
+90.5%
| 84
−90.5%
|
| Full HD | 60−65
+87.5%
| 32
−87.5%
|
| 4K | 18−20
+80%
| 10
−80%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 12.79 | 6.48 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 3 MB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 850M in performance tests.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
