GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition vs GTX 675M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 675M SLI and GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
675M SLI outperforms 780M Mac Edition by a significant 29% 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 | 557 | 625 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.06 | 3.89 |
| Architecture | Fermi (2010−2014) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
| GPU code name | N12E-GTX2 | GK104 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 6 January 2011 (14 years ago) | 8 November 2013 (12 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. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 768 | 1536 |
| Core clock speed | 620 MHz | 771 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 797 MHz |
| Number of transistors | no data | 3,540 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 2x 100 Watt | 122 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 102.0 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 2.448 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 32 |
| TMUs | no data | 128 |
| L1 Cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 Cache | no data | 512 KB |
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).
| Laptop size | large | no data |
| Interface | no data | MXM-B (3.0) |
| SLI options | + | - |
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 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 3000 MHz | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 160.0 GB/s |
| 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 | no data | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11 | 12 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | 1.1.126 |
| CUDA | + | 3.0 |
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
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+40%
|
30−33
−40%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+33.3%
|
12−14
−33.3%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+29.6%
|
27−30
−29.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+40%
|
30−33
−40%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+33.3%
|
12−14
−33.3%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 30−35
+37.5%
|
24−27
−37.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+44.4%
|
18−20
−44.4%
|
| Fortnite | 45−50
+40%
|
35−40
−40%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+33.3%
|
27−30
−33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 24−27
+33.3%
|
18−20
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
+38.1%
|
21−24
−38.1%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
+38.3%
|
60−65
−38.3%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+29.6%
|
27−30
−29.6%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 40−45
+40%
|
30−33
−40%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 120−130
+33.7%
|
95−100
−33.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+33.3%
|
12−14
−33.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 60−65
+35.6%
|
45−50
−35.6%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 30−35
+37.5%
|
24−27
−37.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+44.4%
|
18−20
−44.4%
|
| Fortnite | 45−50
+40%
|
35−40
−40%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+33.3%
|
27−30
−33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 24−27
+33.3%
|
18−20
−33.3%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 30−33
+42.9%
|
21−24
−42.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
+33.3%
|
12−14
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
+38.1%
|
21−24
−38.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+31.3%
|
16−18
−31.3%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
+38.3%
|
60−65
−38.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 35−40
+29.6%
|
27−30
−29.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 16−18
+33.3%
|
12−14
−33.3%
|
| Dota 2 | 60−65
+35.6%
|
45−50
−35.6%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 30−35
+37.5%
|
24−27
−37.5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+44.4%
|
18−20
−44.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+33.3%
|
27−30
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
+38.1%
|
21−24
−38.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+31.3%
|
16−18
−31.3%
|
| Valorant | 80−85
+38.3%
|
60−65
−38.3%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 45−50
+40%
|
35−40
−40%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 14−16
+50%
|
10−11
−50%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 60−65
+37.8%
|
45−50
−37.8%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10−11
+42.9%
|
7−8
−42.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+43.3%
|
30−33
−43.3%
|
| Valorant | 90−95
+30%
|
70−75
−30%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 18−20
+50%
|
12−14
−50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+50%
|
4−5
−50%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 14−16
+50%
|
10−11
−50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 16−18
+41.7%
|
12−14
−41.7%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+35.7%
|
14−16
−35.7%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−12
+37.5%
|
8−9
−37.5%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 16−18
+41.7%
|
12−14
−41.7%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 18−20
+35.7%
|
14−16
−35.7%
|
| Metro Exodus | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Valorant | 40−45
+40%
|
30−33
−40%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+50%
|
6−7
−50%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−33
+42.9%
|
21−24
−42.9%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 7−8
+40%
|
5−6
−40%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 12−14
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 7.90 | 6.12 |
| Recency | 6 January 2011 | 8 November 2013 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 2 Watt | 122 Watt |
GTX 675M SLI has a 29.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 6000% lower power consumption.
GTX 780M Mac Edition, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce GTX 675M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
