GeForce GTX 850M vs 780 Ti

Place in performance ranking	205	541
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.25	3.93
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code name	GK110	N15P-GT
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	7 November 2013 (10 years ago)	12 March 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$699	no data
Current price	$461 (0.7x MSRP)	$163

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 780 Ti has 34% better value for money than GTX 850M.

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	2880	640
CUDA cores	2880	640
Core clock speed	875 MHz	Up to 936 MHz
Boost clock speed	928 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	7,080 million	1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	45 Watt
Texture fill rate	210 billion/sec	36.08
Floating-point performance	5,345 gflops	1,155 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 780 Ti and GeForce GTX 850M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). 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	PCI Express 3.0	PCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	10.5" (26.7 cm)	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	One 8-pin and one 6-pin	no data
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	DDR3, GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	4 GB
Standard memory configuration	no data	DDR3 or GDDR5
Memory bus width	384 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	7.0 GB/s	Up to 2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	336 GB/s	80.0 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

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	One Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort	No outputs
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
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	+	+
HDCP	+	no data
HDCP content protection	no data	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	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.

Blu Ray 3D	+	no data
3D Gaming	+	no data
3D Vision	+	no data
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	no data	+
Optimus	no data	+
3D Vision Live	+	no data
Ansel	no data	+

API compatibility

List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (11_1)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.4	4.5
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	1.1.126
CUDA	+	+

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.

GTX 780 Ti 24.64
+278%

GTX 850M 6.51

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 278% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 780 Ti 9516
+279%

GTX 850M 2514

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 279% in Passmark.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 780 Ti 15619
+256%

GTX 850M 4386

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 256% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 780 Ti 38813
+145%

GTX 850M 15863

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 145% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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%

GTX 780 Ti 11812
+283%

GTX 850M 3086

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 283% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

GTX 780 Ti 75688
+246%

GTX 850M 21873

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 246% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 9%

GTX 780 Ti 28179
+193%

GTX 850M 9621

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 193% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GTX 780 Ti 26297
+203%

GTX 850M 8686

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 203% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 780 Ti 20877
+124%

GTX 850M 9302

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 124% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

Unigine Heaven 3.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark using Unigine, a 3D game engine by eponymous Russian company. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. Version 3.0 was released in 2012, and in 2013 it was superseded by Heaven 4.0, which introduced several slight improvements, including a newer version of Unigine.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 780 Ti 143
+243%

GTX 850M 42

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 243% in Unigine Heaven 3.0.

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 780 Ti 103
+312%

GTX 850M 25

780 Ti outperforms 850M by 312% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

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	300−350 +257%	84 −257%
Full HD	95 +188%	33 −188%
4K	40−45 +264%	11 −264%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

40−45

no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	40−45	no data
Battlefield 5	80−85	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45	no data
Far Cry 5	55−60	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65	no data
Forza Horizon 4	100−110	no data
Hitman 3	50−55	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100	no data
Metro Exodus	80−85	no data
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	80−85	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	70−75	no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	40−45	no data
Battlefield 5	80−85	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45	no data
Far Cry 5	55−60	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	60−65	no data
Forza Horizon 4	100−110	no data
Hitman 3	50−55	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100	no data
Metro Exodus	80−85	no data
Red Dead Redemption 2	65−70	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	80−85	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	70−75	no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	45−50	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	40−45	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	50−55	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45	no data
Far Cry 5	55−60	no data
Forza Horizon 4	100−110	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	95−100	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	80−85	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	55−60	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	70−75	no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

65−70

no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	50−55	no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	24−27	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	30−35	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	no data
Far Cry 5	40−45	no data
Forza Horizon 4	45−50	no data
Hitman 3	27−30	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55	no data
Metro Exodus	45−50	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	50−55	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	18−20	no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

40−45

no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	24−27	no data
Far Cry New Dawn	18−20	no data
Hitman 3	18−20	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30	no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	16−18	no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30	no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16	no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14	no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16	no data
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7	no data
Far Cry 5	14−16	no data
Forza Horizon 4	30−35	no data
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30	no data
Metro Exodus	24−27	no data
Watch Dogs: Legion	10−12	no data