GPU performance Check also GPU performance comparison tool.

Desktop GPUs with similar performance to mobile GPUs High-end GeForce GTX 1080 notebook ~= GeForce GTX 1080 desktop

~= GeForce GeForce GTX 1070 notebook ~= GeForce GTX 1070 / 980 Ti / Titan X desktop

~= GeForce GeForce GTX 1060 notebook ~= GeForce GTX 1060 / 980 desktop GeForce GTX 980 notebook SLI ~= GeForce GTX 1080 desktop

~= GeForce GeForce GTX 980 notebook ~= GeForce GTX 980 desktop

~= GeForce GeForce GTX 980M ~= GeForce GTX 970 Mid-range GeForce GTX 1050 Ti notebook ~= GeForce GTX 1050 Ti desktop / GTX 960

~= GeForce / GeForce GTX 1050 notebook ~= GeForce GTX 1050 desktop / GTX 760 GeForce GTX 970M ~= GeForce GTX 960

~= GeForce GeForce GTX 965M ~= Radeon HD 7870 Low-end GeForce GTX 960M ~= GeForce GTX 750 Ti

~= GeForce GeForce GTX 860M ~= GeForce GTX 750

~= GeForce GeForce GTX 950M ~= GeForce GTX 750

~= GeForce GeForce GTX 940M ~= GeForce GT 640

Mobile Quadro vs GeForce equivalents High-end Quadro P5000 ~= GeForce GTX 1070

~= GeForce Quadro P4000 ~= GeForce GTX 1065

~= GeForce Quadro P3000 ~= GeForce GTX 1060 Quadro M5000M ~= GeForce GTX 980M

~= GeForce Quadro M4000M ~= GeForce GTX 970M Mid-range Quadro M3000M ~= GeForce GTX 965M

~= GeForce Quadro M2000M ~= GeForce GTX 960M

~= GeForce Quadro M1000M ~= GeForce GTX 950M Low-end Quadro M600M ~= GeForce 940M

~= GeForce Quadro M500M ~= GeForce 930M

Mobile GPUs with performance similar to game consoles Playstation 4 ~= GeForce GTX 960M

~= GeForce Xbox One ~= GeForce GTX 950M

Requirements and caveats This is more or less what I'm looking for in a notebook (whole info I collect here is heavily slanted towards this): I work primarily with WebGL, occasionally I like to play modern games so a good graphics is a must (this immediately excludes majority of notebooks on the market, graphics is a relatively small niche). I also care about portability so it shouldn't be too big and heavy (under 2 kg, under 1 inch thick would be ideal). I can sacrifice battery life though, most of the times I work with power plugged in (battery life vs fast graphics is trade-off, you can't have both). I look for notebook with 13-15 inch display, with at least 1080p resolution (do not ever accept less). CPU basically doesn't matter much. I haven't been bottlenecked by CPU already for long (all i5 and i7 are ok). decent graphics I mean GPU that can run modern 3D AAA games at playable framerates (30-60+ fps) with at least 1080p resolution on high quality settings. ByI mean GPU that can run modern 3D AAA games at playable framerates () with at leastresolution onsettings. Decent graphics should also run newer unreleased games with at least medium quality for some time in the future. This is much fuzzier criteria, but generally if GPU struggles even on already released titles, there is a high chance titles released in 1-2 years will be not playable there, so 60+ fps on existing titles is preferable to 30+ fps. This excludes faster lower-end GPUs and thus all ultraportables. It's also possible to get better than decent graphics, but this is another market segment, namely tank-like notebooks. Be aware though that even the fastest notebooks are still slower than decent desktop. If you need non-gaming professional graphics, e.g. for CAD or visualizations, your requirements should be pretty much the same as for games, just additionally you'll also need non-crappy OpenGL drivers. Basically you'll know if your software needs something special, but generally "professional/workstation" GPUs are not needed (Nvidia Quadro or AMD FirePro models). You pay significant premium here mostly for ensuring GPU drivers don't break specialized software, also double-precision performance may be better. Caveat 1: Please be aware that good notebook design is very much about balance of different requirements, often contradictory. If your use case or personal preferences are different from mine, optimal notebook for you may be very different (e.g. maximum portability or maximum performance). Caveat 2: Hardware moves forwards fast, my observations and tips are time sensitive. I wrote bulk of these tips at the beginning of July 2014, if you read them later, they may be already obsolete (though some parts should still hold independently of the time and I keep updating hardware news from time to time). Caveat 3: I'll focus on notebooks with discrete Nvidia GPUs. Right now notebook GPU market is quite segmented, with Nvidia dominating high-end and medium-end niches, while Intel and AMD focus more on lower-end (notebooks with faster AMD GPUs are relatively rare). I'll focus on notebooks with. Right now notebook GPU market is quite segmented, with Nvidia dominating high-end and medium-end niches, while Intel and AMD focus more on lower-end (notebooks with faster AMD GPUs are relatively rare). Both Intel's Iris Pro and AMD's Kaveri are interesting and open new possibilities for ultra-portable lightweight notebooks with long battery life, but that's not my focus here, I need more GPU power. Also both AMD and Intel tend to have worse drivers than Nvidia. This pops-up in my daily work, majority of weird WebGL troubles reported by users come from systems with AMD and Intel GPUs.

Time-independent tips Few heuristics to help navigate treacherous waters of notebooks market, independently of when you are looking for a new notebook or which are your preferences. 1. Ignore marketing Check manufacturer provided information for objective specifications but beware of subtle or not so subtle manipulations. Notebooks are about balance, marketing is about bullet points and charts, there is inherent conflict of interests here. Beware of marketing photos: notebooks may be posed in angles to look thinner, dramatically lit and photoshopped so that chassis material quality appear higher. Instead look for what actual notebook owners are saying. Professional reviews are somehow inbetween. There are some good ones, but many reviews out there are superficial, missing crucial purchase-decision-making information, focusing on things that don't matter that much. Prefer detailed reviews from specialized sites over quick reviews from popular generic tech sites. Virtually every problem I ever had with notebooks was foretold by somebody somewhere on the web. Historically the best actionable information came from various users forums (either manufacturer or 3rd party ones). So google for exact model name / number of notebook you plan to buy, and venture beyond obvious top hits, look for signs of systematic troubles. 2. You can do better than safe There is no single manufacturer / brand that would be persistently optimal choice (e.g. Macbook or Thinkpad). Picking a good brand will mostly just protect you from making a terrible mistake. Which may still be a pretty decent goal - notebook market is a mess. With notebooks if you don't take care, it's pretty easy to make a mistake and end up with expensive hardware you'll end up hating. This is BTW what made Apple a very rich company - they don't always make the best devices at the time but they do make devices which are "safe" to buy. Often though you can do better than "safe" you just need to put in the effort. Few hours of research are well worth it for something you'll be using daily for years. 3. Thermal design is the king Especially when you want powerful graphics. Pretty much everything else important in notebooks is intertwined with thermal design - power, temperature, noise, size, weight, battery life, reliability, life-time. It's hard to make a good thermal design. Well balanced models are relatively rare, you have to actively look for them, there are many more bad notebooks than there are good ones. Bad notebooks happen when marketing wins over engineering. It's relatively easy to put together fast notebook, it's harder to put together mechanically well-built notebook, it's even harder to put together notebook that is fast and keeps cool. You have to actively look for signs of bad thermal design, no manufacturer will tell you directly. Keywords: overheating, throttling, heat, noise, weird anomalies in benchmarks. 4. Not every year is a good year for buying a notebook All notebook manufactures can cook their machines only from hardware components which are available on the market. Hardware proceeds in generations, variance between manufacturers inside a hardware generation are often smaller than variance between generations. By generations I mean CPU and GPU architectures (e.g. Intel's Haswell/Broadwell/Skylake or Nvidia's Kepler/Maxwell/Pascal), usually alternating between micro-architecture changes and sillicon die shrinking. This means if components are wrong in a particular generation, nobody will have a good solution, even expensive premium brands. For the most of 2014 there was exactly such wrong generation (Haswell + Kepler). 2015 is better with Haswell + Maxwell (and eventually Broadwell + Maxwell). 2016 should be even better with Skylake + Pascal. Please note it's still fully possible to create bad notebooks also from good components. In fact this happens often. It's worth repeating - there are many more bad notebooks than there are good ones. You know components are bad (as opposed to just notebook design being bad) when nobody was able to put together great model in the current hardware generation. 5. It's as much about psychology as about hardware Good notebooks are expensive. Even if price is not an issue for you, nobody likes to waste money. Big issue with notebooks is moral obsolescence. While not as bad as with smartphones and tablets, it's still a big factor here. It's painful to buy something knowing something better is always behind the corner. This is unavoidable. With good timing and a bit of luck though you can minimize time you feel behind. I try to aim for at least 2x increase in power between my notebooks (while keeping all other parameters at least equal or better). In practice this corresponded to at least ~2-3 years between notebooks. If you time buying of your new notebooks well, you can get above average performance at the beginning of your cycle (compared to most other people), slowly dropping down to somehow below average but still acceptable performance at the end of your cycle. Sidenote: if you prefer ultra-slim machines with long battery life, you'll always feel behind, no matter of hardware advances. This is psychology: it's about relative speed compared to what's out there, not absolute power of hardware. You'll feel behind even if your ultra-portable packs more power than desktop replacement brick some years ago. Rule-of-thumb: if you want to stay at cutting edge of size and battery life, it's like going 5 years back in time.

GPU chips Nvidia GPU naming scheme: PREFIX XYY SUFFIX PREFIX XYY SUFFIX First digit / hundreds corresponds to series (time of release + HW generation): 7XX, 8XX, 9XX

Last two digits are models in series (increasing in power): 920 < 930 < 940 < 950 < 960 < 965 < 970 < 980

Optional M suffix indicates mobile version: 860M Prefix plus last two digits indicate category: low-end (mainstream): no prefix, G, GT [X00-X35]: 920M, 930M, 940M

(mainstream): no prefix, [X00-X35]: 920M, 930M, 940M mid-range (performance): GT, GTS, GTX [X40-X65]: GTX 950M, GTX 960M, GTX 965M

(performance): [X40-X65]: GTX 950M, GTX 960M, GTX 965M high-end (enthusiast): GTX [X70-X95]: GTX 970M, GTX 980M Last digit 0 usually means initial cards in series, last digit 5 usually means refresh in the midst of series lifetime. Desktop Nvidia GPUs also get Ti suffix for performance boosted variants and have additional Titan classes for top-performance power-hungry flagship chips (with physically largest sillicon size). Performance goes up with new series, but in general variance is much higher between models inside series: Higher models use larger sillicon chips, have more shader cores, larger bus widths and bandwidth transfers, use faster memories, but they also do consume more power. New series usually come with new micro-architecture (Kepler => Maxwell => Pascal), shrinking of die sizes (40nm => 28nm =>20 nm) and other goodies. This brings higher efficiency, getting more operations / Watt. Different GPU models use the same hardware chip designs, optionally disabling parts of sillicon (getting different shader counts), using different clock speeds to segment the market (and to increase chip yield). These chip designs are denoted with GXYYY code names (e.g. 860M Maxwell variant uses GM107 chip while 860M Kepler variant uses GK104 chip). Here lower last digit means bigger more powerful chip (GK208 < GK107 < GK106 < GK104 < GK110). First digit means architecture generation, updated design can bring new HW level features (1. gen Maxwells GM107, GM108 vs 2. gen Maxwell GM204). Besides GPU chip capabilities, also type of video memory can have significant effect on overall performance. There may be the same GPUs offered with either slow DDR3 or fast GDDR5 VRAM. Sidenote: Raw shader computing power (ALU) grows at much faster rate than bandwidth and ROP. This affects how games are made, optimizations from yesterday are not necessarily good for today. It's also one of the reasons why we need different benchmarks, bottlenecks shift over the time, hardware and software is co-evolving together.

Nvidia 800 mobile series Previous GPU series , used mostly during 2014. Mix of Keplers and first generation Maxwells. Design goal for Maxwell was not just the usual increase of power but also significant decrease of energy consumption. This matters a lot more for mobile than for desktop chips. Nvidia originally intended Maxwell to run on 20 nm technology, but because their chip foundry TSMC had troubles with the 20 nm process rollout, Nvidia started to release Maxwell chips just on older 28 nm technology. First Maxwell batch, released in March 2014, included low-end models: GeForce 830M (GM108, 256 cores, DDR3, 25W)

(GM108, 256 cores, DDR3, 25W) GeForce 840M (GM108, 384 cores, DDR3, 30W) And medium-end models: GeForce GTX 850M (GM107, 640 cores, DDR3/GDDR5, 40W)

(GM107, 640 cores, DDR3/GDDR5, 40W) GeForce GTX 860M (GM107, 640 cores, GDDR5, 40-45W) And medium-end models: Confusingly Nvidia 800 series also included 28 nm Kepler medium-end and high-end models: GeForce GTX 860M (GK104, 1152 cores, GDDR5, 75W)

(GK104, 1152 cores, GDDR5, 75W) GeForce GTX 870M (GK104, 1344 cores, GDDR5, 100W)

(GK104, 1344 cores, GDDR5, 100W) GeForce GTX 880M (GK104, 1536 cores, GDDR5, 105W) And one straggler older 28 nm Fermi low-end model: GeForce 820M (GF117, 96 cores, DDR3, 15W) And one straggler older 28 nm Fermi low-end model:

CPU chips Haswell CPUs (4th generation) Right now almost all notebooks with decent graphics use just a tiny subset of Intel's Haswell CPUs (quadcore i7). Line 1: CPUs with HD Graphic 4400 integrated graphics: i7-4700HQ, i7-4710HQ, i7-4720HQ. Line 2: CPUs with Iris Pro 5200 integrated graphics: i7-4860HQ, i7-4870HQ. There is very little CPU performance variance across interesting notebooks. Only very small CPU clock updates come with time (+100 MHz, resulting in low single digit performance increases). As Haswells are too hot, it's better to try to get lower-clocked CPU and with lesser iGPU. Almost all cooling issues for current generation of notebooks come from CPU.

Broadwell CPUs (5th generation) Intel's new Broadwell CPUs are supposed to be an improvement over hot Haswells but unfortunately Broadwell has been plagued by delays. Only lower-power Broadwells are out so far, usable just for ultrabooks. High-power Broadwell successors to Haswells used in faster notebooks should come only sometime mid 2015. Broadwell is 14 nm die shrink of 22 nm Haswell while keeping the same architecture. Performance should be pretty similar but it should help with heat (which is the biggest weakness of Haswell for notebooks).

Skylake CPUs (6th generation) Somehow curiously, due to large Broadwell delays, we may get its successor - Skylake - in similar time. It's a new CPU architecture coming on 14 nm node. First CPUs should be out sometime in Q3 2015. It's not clear if among those first Skylake CPUs would be some CPUs usable for fast notebooks.

Kaby Lake CPUs (7th generation) Launched in January 2017.

Maxwell GPUs reviews

Notebooks with GTX 860M 13 inch Alienware 13 14 inch Gigabyte P34G v2 15 inch HP Omen

Pascal GPUs reviews

Notebooks with GTX 1050 Ti 15 inch Gigabyte Sabre 15

Lenovo Legion Y520

Polaris GPUs reviews

Notebooks with RX 460 15 inch HP Omen 15

Notebooks with RX 470 15 inch Alienware 15 R3 17 inch Alienware 17 R4

GTX 860M

GTX 960M

GTX 965M

MSI GS60 2QD Ghost (15" screen, thin, GTX 965M) screen: 15.6" (1080p IPS matte)

15.6" (1080p IPS matte) height: 20 mm

20 mm weight: 2 kg (+ 0.7 kg power supply)

2 kg (+ 0.7 kg power supply) CPU: Intel i7-4720HQ (incl. HD Graphics 4600) | i7-5700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 5600)

Intel i7-4720HQ (incl. HD Graphics 4600) | i7-5700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 5600) GPU: Nvidia GTX 965M 2 GB VRAM

Nvidia GTX 965M 2 GB VRAM Nvidia Optimus: yes

yes external displays: 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, 1x HDMI 1.4b (driven by Intel GPU)

1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, 1x HDMI 1.4b (driven by Intel GPU) links: product page Not available yet

Gigabyte Aorus X5 (15" screen, thin, SLI 2x GTX 965M) screen: 15.6" (3K IPS G-Sync)

15.6" (3K IPS G-Sync) height: 23 mm

23 mm weight: 2.5 kg (+ ??? kg power supply)

2.5 kg (+ ??? kg power supply) CPU: i7-5700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 5600)

i7-5700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 5600) GPU: SLI 2x Nvidia GTX 965M 4 GB VRAM

SLI 2x Nvidia GTX 965M 4 GB VRAM Nvidia Optimus: no

no external displays: 1x mini-DisplayPort, 1x HDMI (driven by Nvidia GPU)

1x mini-DisplayPort, 1x HDMI (driven by Nvidia GPU) links: LaptopOracle review

Hexus review

TechRadar review

MSI GS70 2QD Stealth (17" screen, thin, GTX 965M) screen: 17.3" (1080p TN matte)

17.3" (1080p TN matte) height: 21.8 mm

21.8 mm weight: 2.76 kg (+ 0.65 kg power supply)

2.76 kg (+ 0.65 kg power supply) CPU: Intel i7-4720HQ (incl. HD Graphics 4600) | i7-5700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 5600)

Intel i7-4720HQ (incl. HD Graphics 4600) | i7-5700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 5600) GPU: Nvidia GTX 965M 2 GB VRAM

Nvidia GTX 965M 2 GB VRAM Nvidia Optimus: yes

yes external displays: 2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, 1x HDMI 1.4b (driven by Intel GPU)

2x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, 1x HDMI 1.4b (driven by Intel GPU) links: product page Not yet available

Asus G751JL (17" screen, big, GTX 965M) screen: 17.3" (1080p IPS matte)

17.3" (1080p IPS matte) height: 43.2 mm

43.2 mm weight: 3.8 kg (+ ??? kg power supply)

3.8 kg (+ ??? kg power supply) CPU: Intel i7-4720HQ (incl. HD Graphics 4600)

Intel i7-4720HQ (incl. HD Graphics 4600) GPU: Nvidia GTX 965M 2 GB VRAM

Nvidia GTX 965M 2 GB VRAM Nvidia Optimus: no

no external displays: 1x VGA, 1x Thunderbolt 2, 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, 1x HDMI 1.4 (driven by Nvidia)

1x VGA, 1x Thunderbolt 2, 1x mini-DisplayPort 1.2, 1x HDMI 1.4 (driven by Nvidia) links: Not available yet

Gigabyte P37K (17" screen, thin, GTX 965M) screen: 17.3" (1080p IPS)

17.3" (1080p IPS) height: 23 mm

23 mm weight: 2.8 kg (+ ??? kg power supply)

2.8 kg (+ ??? kg power supply) CPU: Intel i7-4720HQ (incl. HD Graphics 4600) | i7-5700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 5600)

Intel i7-4720HQ (incl. HD Graphics 4600) | i7-5700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 5600) GPU: Nvidia GTX 965M 4 GB VRAM

Nvidia GTX 965M 4 GB VRAM Nvidia Optimus: yes

yes external displays: 1x mini-DisplayPort, 1x HDMI (driven by Intel GPU)

1x mini-DisplayPort, 1x HDMI (driven by Intel GPU) links: Not yet available

GTX 970M

MSI GS73 Stealth Pro (17" screen, thin, GTX 970M) screen: 17.3"

17.3" height: ?? mm

?? mm weight: ?? kg (+ ?? kg power supply)

?? kg (+ ?? kg power supply) CPU: Intel i7-6700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 530)

Intel i7-6700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 530) GPU: Nvidia GTX 970M ??? GB VRAM

Nvidia GTX 970M ??? GB VRAM Nvidia Optimus: ???

??? external displays: 1x Thunderbolt (driven by ???) + ??? Not yet available

GTX 980M

GTX 1050

GTX 1050 Ti

GTX 1060

Aorus X3 Plus v6 (14" screen, thin, GTX 1060) screen: 13.9" (3200x1800 IPS)

13.9" (3200x1800 IPS) height: 23 mm

23 mm weight: 1.8 kg (+ ?? kg power supply)

1.8 kg (+ ?? kg power supply) CPU: Intel i7-6820HK (incl. HD Graphics 530)

Intel i7-6820HK (incl. HD Graphics 530) GPU: Nvidia GTX 1060 6 GB VRAM

Nvidia GTX 1060 6 GB VRAM Nvidia Optimus: yes

yes external displays: 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x Mini-DisplayPort (driven by Nvidia GPU)

1x HDMI 2.0, 1x Mini-DisplayPort (driven by Nvidia GPU) power supply: 150W

150W battery: 73.26Wh

73.26Wh links: product page Not yet available.

GTX 1070

Gigabyte P35X v6 (15" screen, thin, GTX 1070) screen: 15.6" (3840x2160 IPS | 1920x1080 IPS)

15.6" (3840x2160 IPS | 1920x1080 IPS) height: 21 mm

21 mm weight: 2.4 kg (+ ?? kg power supply)

2.4 kg (+ ?? kg power supply) CPU: Intel i7-6700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 530)

Intel i7-6700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 530) GPU: GTX 1070 8GB VRAM

GTX 1070 8GB VRAM Nvidia Optimus: yes

yes external displays: 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x mini-DisplayPort (connected to Nvidia GPU)

1x HDMI 2.0, 1x mini-DisplayPort (connected to Nvidia GPU) power supply: 200W

200W battery: 75.81Wh

75.81Wh links: product page Pete J’s Gigabyte P35X v6 review

EVGA SC17 1070 (17" screen, thin, GTX 1070) screen: 17.3" (3840x2160 IPS)

17.3" (3840x2160 IPS) height: 27 mm

27 mm weight: 4.1 kg (+ 0.8 kg power supply)

4.1 kg (+ 0.8 kg power supply) CPU: Intel i7-6820HK (incl. HD Graphics 530)

Intel i7-6820HK (incl. HD Graphics 530) GPU: GTX 1070 8GB VRAM

GTX 1070 8GB VRAM Nvidia Optimus: yes

yes external displays: 1x HDMI 2.0b, 2x mini-DisplayPort

1x HDMI 2.0b, 2x mini-DisplayPort power supply: 240W

240W battery: 74.48Wh

74.48Wh links: product page NotebookCheck review

Gigabyte P37X v6 (17" screen, thin, GTX 1070) screen: 17.3" (3840x2160 IPS | 1920x1080 IPS)

17.3" (3840x2160 IPS | 1920x1080 IPS) height: 23 mm

23 mm weight: 2.8 kg (+ ?? kg power supply)

2.8 kg (+ ?? kg power supply) CPU: Intel i7-6700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 530)

Intel i7-6700HQ (incl. HD Graphics 530) GPU: GTX 1070 8GB VRAM

GTX 1070 8GB VRAM Nvidia Optimus: yes

yes external displays: 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x mini-DisplayPort (connected to Nvidia GPU)

1x HDMI 2.0, 1x mini-DisplayPort (connected to Nvidia GPU) power supply: 200W

200W battery: 75.81Wh

75.81Wh links: product page Not yet available.

GTX 1080