GeForce GT 720 vs GTX 850M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

GTX 850M
2014
4 GB DDR3, GDDR5, 45 Watt
6.50
+311%

GTX 850M outperforms GT 720 by a whopping 311% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in performance ranking541921
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.890.02
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code nameN15P-GTGK208B
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date12 March 2014 (10 years ago)29 September 2014 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$49
Current price$163 $394 (8x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 850M has 19350% better value for money than GT 720.

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 cores640192
CUDA cores640192
Core clock speedUp to 936 MHz797 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million915 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt19 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data98 °C
Texture fill rate36.0812.75
Floating-point performance1,155 gflops306.0 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 850M and GeForce GT 720 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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0PCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x8
Lengthno data5.7" (14.5 cm)
Heightno data2.713" (6.9 cm)
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
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 typeDDR3, GDDR5DDR3 / GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB or 1 GB
Standard memory configurationDDR3 or GDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2500 MHz1.8 GBps or 5.0 GB/s
Memory bandwidth80.0 GB/s14.4 (DDR3) or 40 (GDDR5)
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 ConnectorsNo outputsDual Link DVI-DHDMIVGA
Multi monitor supportno data3 displays
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI++
HDCPno data+
HDCP content protection+no data
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal
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.

3D Blu-Rayno data+
3D Gamingno data+
3D Visionno data+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+no data
Optimus+no data
Ansel+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.4
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
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 850M 6.50
+311%
GT 720 1.58

GTX 850M outperforms GT 720 by 311% 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 850M 2512
+312%
GT 720 610

GTX 850M outperforms GT 720 by 312% in Passmark.

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 850M 3086
+323%
GT 720 730

GTX 850M outperforms GT 720 by 323% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

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 850M 9753
+461%
GT 720 1740

GTX 850M outperforms GT 720 by 461% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GTX 850M 8686
+396%
GT 720 1750

GTX 850M outperforms GT 720 by 396% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 850M 9302
+514%
GT 720 1514

GTX 850M outperforms GT 720 by 514% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

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 850M 25
+213%
GT 720 8

GTX 850M outperforms GT 720 by 213% 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:

900p84
+367%
18−21
−367%
Full HD33
+313%
8−9
−313%
4K10
+400%
2−3
−400%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Hitman 3 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Hitman 3 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+400%
4−5
−400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
+320%
5−6
−320%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+360%
5−6
−360%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+380%
5−6
−380%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+450%
2−3
−450%
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+350%
4−5
−350%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 10−11
+400%
2−3
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
+367%
3−4
−367%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
High Preset

Far Cry 5 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5 0−1
Hitman 3 3−4 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4 0−1
Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Metro Exodus 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%

This is how GTX 850M and GT 720 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 850M is 367% faster in 900p
  • GTX 850M is 313% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 850M is 400% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.50 1.58
Recency 12 March 2014 29 September 2014
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB or 1 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 19 Watt

The GeForce GTX 850M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 720 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 850M is a notebook card while GeForce GT 720 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M
GeForce GTX 850M
NVIDIA GeForce GT 720
GeForce GT 720

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 505 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 850M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 442 votes

Rate GeForce GT 720 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.