GeForce GTX 760M vs Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile and GeForce GTX 760M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile
2018
3 MB GDDR5
10.69
+175%

Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile outperforms GTX 760M by a whopping 175% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking410670
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data5.63
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameno dataGK106
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release dateApril 2018 (6 years ago)30 May 2013 (11 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 cores768768
Core clock speed1366 MHz657 MHz
Boost clock speed1442 MHz657 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data55 Watt
Texture fill rateno data42.05
Floating-point processing powerno data1.009 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data64

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount3 MB2 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataGDDR5
Memory bus width96 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1752 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth84 GB/s64.0 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
HDMI-+
HDCP content protection-+
G-SYNC support+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI-+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming-+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Blu-Ray 3D Support-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus-+
3D Vision / 3DTV Play-+
Multi-Projection+no data
Multi Monitor+no data

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectXno data12 API
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.5
OpenCLno data1.1
Vulkan+1.1.126
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile 10.69
+175%
GTX 760M 3.89

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.

Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile 6401
+182%
GTX 760M 2271

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:

900p100−110
+156%
39
−156%
Full HD120−130
+161%
46
−161%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 98
+0%
98
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Valorant 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile and GTX 760M compete in popular games:

  • Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile is 156% faster in 900p
  • Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile is 161% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 58 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.69 3.89
Maximum RAM amount 3 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm

Nvidia GTX 1050 3GB Mobile has a 174.8% higher aggregate performance score, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 760M, on the other hand, has a 68166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 760M in performance tests.

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 1050 3GB Mobile
GeForce GTX 1050 3GB
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M
GeForce GTX 760M

Other comparisons

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.


3.8 125 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 105 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 760M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 1050 3GB Mobile or GeForce GTX 760M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.