GRID M60-8Q vs GeForce GTX 965M

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.

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

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

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 Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GRID M60-8Q is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.6% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce GTX 965M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	GRID M60-8Q	GeForce GTX 965M
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+0.6%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.6%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	—	—

💎 Value Proposition

While current pricing data is unavailable, the GRID M60-8Q 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.

GRID M60-8Q Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 965M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GRID M60-8Q and GeForce GTX 965M

GRID M60-8Q

The GRID M60-8Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,884 points.

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.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GRID M60-8Q scores 3,884 and the GeForce GTX 965M reaches 3,860 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID M60-8Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 965M uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID M60-8Q) vs 1,024 (GeForce GTX 965M). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID M60-8Q) vs 2.355 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 965M). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1150 MHz.

Feature	GRID M60-8Q	GeForce GTX 965M
G3D Mark Score	3,884	3,860
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0	Maxwell 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	2048+100%	1024
Compute (TFLOPS)	4.825 TFLOPS+105%	2.355 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1178 MHz+2%	1150 MHz
ROPs	64+100%	32
TMUs	128+100%	64
L1 Cache	768 KB+100%	384 KB
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GRID M60-8Q	GeForce GTX 965M
Upscaling Tech	FSR 1.0 (Software)	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation	Not Supported	FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GRID M60-8Q comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 965M has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 965M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 64-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID M60-8Q) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 965M) — the GRID M60-8Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GRID M60-8Q	GeForce GTX 965M
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	64-bit	128-bit+100%
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GRID M60-8Q draws 225W versus the GeForce GTX 965M's 50W — a 127.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 965M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M60-8Q) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 965M). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.