- Home
- Processors
- Videocards
- Home
- / Videocards
- / Compare videocards
- / NVIDIA GeForce MX130 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
NVIDIA GeForce MX130 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce MX130 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
NVIDIA GeForce MX130 
vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce MX130
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 8 month(s) later
- Around 2% higher core clock speed: 1122 MHz vs 1096 MHz
- Around 6% higher boost clock speed: 1242 MHz vs 1176 MHz
- 2.5x lower typical power consumption: 30 Watt vs 75 Watt
- 2x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 2500 MHz
| Launch date | 17 November 2017 vs 13 March 2015 |
| Core clock speed | 1122 MHz vs 1096 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1242 MHz vs 1176 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt vs 75 Watt |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 2500 MHz |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
- Around 58% higher texture fill rate: 47.04 GTexel / s vs 29.81 GTexel / s
- Around 67% higher pipelines: 640 vs 384
- Around 58% better floating-point performance: 1,505 gflops vs 953.9 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 86% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3366 vs 1814
- Around 26% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 245 vs 195
- Around 70% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10985 vs 6461
- Around 72% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 54.294 vs 31.613
- Around 96% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 795.325 vs 406.203
- Around 82% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.692 vs 2.034
- Around 71% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 51.794 vs 30.251
- Around 62% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 174.513 vs 107.608
- Around 88% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 5264 vs 2796
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3714 vs 3686
- Around 88% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 5264 vs 2796
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3714 vs 3686
- Around 95% better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 1231 vs 632
| Specifications (specs) |
| Texture fill rate | 47.04 GTexel / s vs 29.81 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 640 vs 384 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,505 gflops vs 953.9 gflops |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
| Benchmarks |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3366 vs 1814 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 245 vs 195 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10985 vs 6461 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.294 vs 31.613 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 795.325 vs 406.203 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.692 vs 2.034 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.794 vs 30.251 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 174.513 vs 107.608 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5264 vs 2796 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 vs 3686 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3357 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5264 vs 2796 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 vs 3686 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3357 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1231 vs 632 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce MX130 GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
| PassMark - G3D Mark | | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | | |
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce MX130 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1814 | 3366 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 195 | 245 |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 6461 | 10985 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 31.613 | 54.294 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 406.203 | 795.325 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 2.034 | 3.692 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 30.251 | 51.794 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 107.608 | 174.513 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 2796 | 5264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3686 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3357 | 3358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 2796 | 5264 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3686 | 3714 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3357 | 3358 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 632 | 1231 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce MX130 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M |
Essentials |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Maxwell |
| Code name | GM108 | GM107 |
| Launch date | 17 November 2017 | 13 March 2015 |
| Place in performance rating | 1013 | 735 |
| Type | Laptop | Laptop |
Technical info |
| Boost clock speed | 1242 MHz | 1176 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1122 MHz | 1096 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 953.9 gflops | 1,505 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 384 | 640 |
| Texture fill rate | 29.81 GTexel / s | 47.04 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 30 Watt | 75 Watt |
| CUDA cores | 640 |
| Transistor count | 1,870 million |
Video outputs and ports |
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | 1 |
| HDMI |
| VGA аnalog display support | 1 |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | MXM-B (3.0) |
| Laptop size | medium sized | medium sized |
| Supplementary power connectors | None |
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 |
API support |
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.5 |
Memory |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 40.1 GB / s | 80 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 64 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 2500 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 / DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
| CUDA |
| GameWorks |
| GeForce Experience |
| GPU Boost |
| Optimus |
| Adaptive VSync |
| Ansel |
| BatteryBoost |
| DSR |
| GameStream |
| GeForce ShadowPlay |
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder |
| SLI |
Navigation
Differences Compare benchmarks Compare specifications (specs)
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare
Compare NVIDIA GeForce MX130 with others
NVIDIAGeForce MX130 vs NVIDIAGeForce4 MX 460 NVIDIAGeForce MX130 vs 
ATIRadeon 9800 PRO NVIDIAGeForce MX130 vs NVIDIAQuadro FX 360M NVIDIAGeForce MX130 vs 
AMDFirePro W4170M NVIDIAGeForce MX130 vs NVIDIAGeForce 845M NVIDIAGeForce MX130 vs AMDRadeon R5 435 OEM About
AskGeek.io - Compare processors and videocards to choose the best.
Sections
Links
Language
English
Deutsch
Française
Español
Português
Русский © 2025, AskGeek.io