GeForce GTX 965M vs GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design

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 is positioned at rank 39 and the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is on rank 66, so the GeForce GTX 965M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 965M

#16

Radeon RX 7600S

MSRP: $269|Avg: $250

90%

#29

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

169%

#31

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

153%

#32

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

153%

#36

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

139%

#37

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

138%

#39

GeForce GTX 965M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#46

Radeon RX 5500M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

93%

#48

GeForce GTX 980 (móvel)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

92%

#49

GeForce 610M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $20

91%

#50

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $75

90%

#53

GeForce GTX 980M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $80

88%

#54

GeForce GTX 770M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

87%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design

#19

Radeon RX 5600

MSRP: $229|Avg: $150

98%

#22

Radeon RX 7700

MSRP: $449|Avg: $399

94%

#56

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

207%

#58

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

188%

#59

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

188%

#63

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

171%

#64

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

169%

#66

GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

100%

#68

GeForce GTX 850M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $40

97%

#78

Radeon HD 8970M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $170

93%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

⚠️ Generational Difference

The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design uses modern memory architecture. The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 965M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.7% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTX 965M.

Insight	GeForce GTX 965M	GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.7%)	✅Leading raw performance (+1.7%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2018 / Pascal (2016−2021))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+0%)
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design 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.

GeForce GTX 965M Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 965M and GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design

GeForce GTX 965M

The GeForce GTX 965M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in 2016. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 944 MHz to 1150 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,860 points.

GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design

The GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 3 2018. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1152 MHz to 1417 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,925 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 965M scores 3,860 and the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design reaches 3,925 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 965M is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,024 (GeForce GTX 965M) vs 768 (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design). Raw compute: 2.355 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 965M) vs 2.177 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design). Boost clocks: 1150 MHz vs 1417 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 965M	GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
G3D Mark Score	3,860	3,925+2%
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	Pascal
Process Node	28 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	1024+33%	768
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.355 TFLOPS+8%	2.177 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1150 MHz	1417 MHz+23%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	64+33%	48
L1 Cache	384 KB+33%	288 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 965M	GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

Both cards feature 4 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.

Feature	GeForce GTX 965M	GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	4 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	80 GB/s	80 GB/s
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 Ultimate (GeForce GTX 965M) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design). Vulkan: 1.4 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 965M	GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
DirectX	12 Ultimate	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.4+8%	1.3
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 5th Gen (HEVC) (GeForce GTX 965M) vs NVENC (6th Gen) (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design). Decoder: PureVideo HD (VP6) vs NVDEC (3rd Gen). Supported codecs: H.264,H.265/HEVC (GeForce GTX 965M) vs H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9 (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design).

Feature	GeForce GTX 965M	GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design
Encoder	NVENC 5th Gen (HEVC)	NVENC (6th Gen)
Decoder	PureVideo HD (VP6)	NVDEC (3rd Gen)
Codecs	H.264,H.265/HEVC	H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP9

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 965M draws 50W versus the GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design's 75W — a 40% difference. The GeForce GTX 965M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 965M) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 1050 with Max-Q Design). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 70°C.