Apple M1 8-Core GPU vs Titan X Pascal

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Titan X Pascal with Apple M1 8-Core GPU, including specs and performance data.

Titan X Pascal
2016
12 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
33.77
+132%

Titan X Pascal outperforms Apple M1 8-Core GPU by a whopping 132% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking154356
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.88no data
Power efficiency9.42no data
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)no data
GPU code nameGP102no data
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date2 August 2016 (8 years ago)10 November 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$1,199 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores35848
Core clock speed1417 MHz1278 MHz
Boost clock speed1531 MHzno data
Number of transistors11,800 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology16 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Wattno data
Texture fill rate342.9no data
Floating-point processing power10.97 TFLOPSno data
ROPs96no data
TMUs224no data

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno 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 typeGDDR5Xno data
Maximum RAM amount12 GBno data
Memory bus width384 Bitno data
Memory clock speed1251 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth480.4 GB/sno data
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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPortno data
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)no data
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL1.2no data
Vulkan+-
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. 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.

Titan X Pascal 33.77
+132%
Apple M1 8-Core GPU 14.54

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Titan X Pascal 514513
+83.6%
Apple M1 8-Core GPU 280200

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:

Full HD127
+354%
28
−354%
1440p71
+137%
30−35
−137%
4K57
+138%
24−27
−138%

Cost per frame, $

1080p9.44no data
1440p16.89no data
4K21.04no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 79
+259%
21−24
−259%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 104
+225%
30−35
−225%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 95
+313%
21−24
−313%
Battlefield 5 174
+278%
45−50
−278%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 108
+286%
27−30
−286%
Cyberpunk 2077 78
+255%
21−24
−255%
Far Cry 5 121
+267%
30−35
−267%
Far Cry New Dawn 138
+254%
35−40
−254%
Forza Horizon 4 240
+161%
90−95
−161%
Hitman 3 104
+285%
27−30
−285%
Horizon Zero Dawn 296
+311%
70−75
−311%
Metro Exodus 143
+204%
45−50
−204%
Red Dead Redemption 2 125
+221%
35−40
−221%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 161
+250%
45−50
−250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 226
+197%
75−80
−197%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 121
+278%
30−35
−278%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 85
+270%
21−24
−270%
Battlefield 5 165
+259%
45−50
−259%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 98
+250%
27−30
−250%
Cyberpunk 2077 69
+214%
21−24
−214%
Far Cry 5 92
+179%
30−35
−179%
Far Cry New Dawn 108
+177%
35−40
−177%
Forza Horizon 4 225
+145%
90−95
−145%
Hitman 3 104
+285%
27−30
−285%
Horizon Zero Dawn 275
+282%
70−75
−282%
Metro Exodus 143
+204%
45−50
−204%
Red Dead Redemption 2 102
+162%
35−40
−162%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 194
+322%
45−50
−322%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 96
+182%
30−35
−182%
Watch Dogs: Legion 216
+184%
75−80
−184%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 67
+109%
30−35
−109%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 63
+174%
21−24
−174%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75
+168%
27−30
−168%
Cyberpunk 2077 59
+168%
21−24
−168%
Far Cry 5 67
+103%
30−35
−103%
Forza Horizon 4 112
+21.7%
90−95
−21.7%
Hitman 3 93
+244%
27−30
−244%
Horizon Zero Dawn 150
+108%
70−75
−108%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 167
+263%
45−50
−263%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 95
+179%
30−35
−179%
Watch Dogs: Legion 64
−18.8%
75−80
+18.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 118
+203%
35−40
−203%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+137%
27−30
−137%
Far Cry New Dawn 50−55
+132%
21−24
−132%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+157%
14−16
−157%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 51
+364%
10−12
−364%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 58
+287%
14−16
−287%
Cyberpunk 2077 38
+443%
7−8
−443%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+144%
16−18
−144%
Forza Horizon 4 190−200
+168%
70−75
−168%
Hitman 3 66
+288%
16−18
−288%
Horizon Zero Dawn 118
+307%
27−30
−307%
Metro Exodus 101
+321%
24−27
−321%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 122
+408%
24−27
−408%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+207%
14−16
−207%
Watch Dogs: Legion 212
+144%
85−90
−144%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 92
+300%
21−24
−300%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 63
+350%
14−16
−350%
Far Cry New Dawn 48
+380%
10−11
−380%
Hitman 3 39
+290%
10−11
−290%
Horizon Zero Dawn 129
+87%
65−70
−87%
Metro Exodus 67
+415%
12−14
−415%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 68
+423%
12−14
−423%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 38
+375%
8−9
−375%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 32
+357%
7−8
−357%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34
+386%
7−8
−386%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+800%
2−3
−800%
Far Cry 5 33
+313%
8−9
−313%
Forza Horizon 4 73
+284%
18−20
−284%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 70
+438%
12−14
−438%
Watch Dogs: Legion 26
+420%
5−6
−420%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 47
+262%
12−14
−262%

This is how Titan X Pascal and Apple M1 8-Core GPU compete in popular games:

  • Titan X Pascal is 354% faster in 1080p
  • Titan X Pascal is 137% faster in 1440p
  • Titan X Pascal is 138% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Cyberpunk 2077, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Titan X Pascal is 800% faster.
  • in Watch Dogs: Legion, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the Apple M1 8-Core GPU is 19% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Titan X Pascal is ahead in 71 test (99%)
  • Apple M1 8-Core GPU is ahead in 1 test (1%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.77 14.54
Recency 2 August 2016 10 November 2020
Chip lithography 16 nm 5 nm

Titan X Pascal has a 132.3% higher aggregate performance score.

Apple M1 8-Core GPU, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, and a 220% more advanced lithography process.

The Titan X Pascal is our recommended choice as it beats the Apple M1 8-Core GPU in performance tests.

Be aware that Titan X Pascal is a desktop card while Apple M1 8-Core GPU is a notebook 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 Titan X Pascal
Titan X Pascal
Apple M1 8-Core GPU
M1 8-Core GPU

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.


2.6 2995 votes

Rate Titan X Pascal on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 909 votes

Rate Apple M1 8-Core GPU 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.