
GeForce GTX 965M SLI vs Radeon RX Vega M GL

GeForce GTX 965M SLI
Popular choices:

Radeon RX Vega M GL
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GTX 965M SLI is positioned at rank 205 and the Radeon RX Vega M GL is on rank 208, so the GeForce GTX 965M SLI offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 965M SLI
Performance Per Dollar Radeon RX Vega M GL
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon RX Vega M GL uses modern memory architecture. The Radeon RX Vega M GL likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 965M SLI lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 965M SLI is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.7% higher G3D Mark score and 100+% more VRAM (2 GB vs 0 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon RX Vega M GL.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 965M SLI | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.7%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.7%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100+%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 965M SLI remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 965M SLI and Radeon RX Vega M GL

GeForce GTX 965M SLI
The GeForce GTX 965M SLI is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 5 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 924 MHz to 950 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,010 points.

Radeon RX Vega M GL
The Radeon RX Vega M GL is manufactured by AMD. It was released in February 1 2018. It features the GCN 4.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 931 MHz to 1011 MHz. It has 1280 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 65W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,906 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 965M SLI scores 4,010 and the Radeon RX Vega M GL reaches 3,906 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 965M SLI is built on Maxwell while the Radeon RX Vega M GL uses GCN 4.0, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 2,048 (GeForce GTX 965M SLI) vs 1,280 (Radeon RX Vega M GL). Boost clocks: 950 MHz vs 1011 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 965M SLI | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 4,010+3% | 3,906 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 4.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+60% | 1280 |
| Boost Clock | 950 MHz | 1011 MHz+6% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 965M SLI | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 965M SLI comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon RX Vega M GL has 0 MB. The GeForce GTX 965M SLI offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 80.2 GB/s x2 (GeForce GTX 965M SLI) vs 179.2 GB/s (Radeon RX Vega M GL) — a 123.4% advantage for the Radeon RX Vega M GL. Bus width: 128-bit x2 vs 1024-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 965M SLI | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | Shared System RAM |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | HBM2 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 80.2 GB/s x2 | 179.2 GB/s+123% |
| Bus Width | 128-bit x2 | 1024-bit+700% |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 965M SLI draws 75W versus the Radeon RX Vega M GL's 65W — a 14.3% difference. The Radeon RX Vega M GL is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 965M SLI) vs 1W (Radeon RX Vega M GL). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs Integrated.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 965M SLI | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 65W-13% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 1W-100% |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | Integrated |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | — | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 80 |
| Perf/Watt | 53.5 | 60.1+12% |
Value Analysis
The Radeon RX Vega M GL is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2015).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 965M SLI | Radeon RX Vega M GL |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $150 |
| Avg Price (30d) | — | $150 |
| Codename | — | Polaris 22 |
| Release | January 5 2015 | February 1 2018 |
| Ranking | #370 | #500 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.















