GeForce 920M vs GeForce 930MX: specs and benchmark comparison
Short verdict
Not enough data for a performance conclusion: the database has no comparable benchmarks for this pair. Below are the key differences in official specifications.
Compare with AIAdvantages
Only measured and rated values: a noticeable benchmark gap and specs where more is better.
Where GeForce 920M is better0
No advantages found in our data.
Where GeForce 930MX is better0
No advantages found in our data.
Benchmarks
Results are compared within one benchmark, one version and the same conditions. Laptop chip results depend on the laptop model: its maker sets the power limit and cooling.
Blender Benchmark 2.90
GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) · s, lower is better
GeForce 920M1,090.7 sGeForce 930MX837.8 sNo advantage conclusion: small sample in one of the results.
About the measurement and source
- A · NVIDIA GeForce 920M
1,090.7 s · community measurement, sample 2 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 2 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 1078.53–1102.88; submissions 2020-09-04 to 2020-11-17; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
- B · NVIDIA GeForce 930MX
837.8 s · community measurement, sample 2 · November 14, 2026
Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation)
Median of 2 submissions (0 outliers excluded), interquartile range 808.37–867.16; submissions 2020-09-25 to 2020-11-29; CUDA backend. Snapshot 2026-11-14.
difference = |A − B| ÷ the smaller value × 100%. The 5% noticeable threshold is a UX heuristic, not statistical significance.
Render time of a single Cycles scene without synchronization. Median of submissions after filtering.
Reference results (16)
| Benchmark | A | B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Blender Benchmark 2.81aGPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 1,061.6 | 928.7 | reference |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 1,105 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 1,045 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.91.2GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | 1,444.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.81GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 3,615.7 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, classroom (CUDA) | 3,609.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.82GPU, fishy_cat (CUDA) | 2,154.4 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 49.8 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.6.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 47.1 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.0.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 45.2 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.1.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | 36.6 | — | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.93.1GPU, bmw27 (CUDA) | — | 721.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.90GPU, bmw27 (OPTIX) | — | 1,002.7 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 2.83GPU, classroom (CUDA) | — | 3,035.2 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 3.4.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 55.9 | no pair |
| Blender Benchmark 4.5.0GPU, sum of scenes monster + junkshop + classroom (CUDA) | — | 84.3 | no pair |
Each benchmark version has its own scale: numbers are compared only within a row.
Specifications
Chip maker values. The laptop maker sets the power limit and clocks in each laptop.
| Specification | A · GeForce 920M | B · GeForce 930MX | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Chip | |||
| GPU chip | GK208 | no data | no data for B |
| Architecture | Kepler | Maxwell | differs |
| Shader unitsShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture. | no data | 384 (CUDA cores) | no data for A |
| Memory | |||
| Video memory | 2 GB | 2 GB | equal |
| Memory type | DDR3 | no data | no data for B |
| Memory bus | 64 bit | no data | no data for B |
| Memory bandwidthExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently. | 14.4 GB/s | no data | no data for B |
| Power and dimensions | |||
| Board powerTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops. | 33 W (TDP) | no data | no data for B |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data | no data for B |
Chip
GPU chip
AGK208
Bno data
no data for BArchitecture
AKepler
BMaxwell
differsShader units
Ano data
B384 (CUDA cores)
no data for AShader unit counts are comparable only within one architecture.
Memory
Video memory
A2 GB
B2 GB
equalMemory type
ADDR3
Bno data
no data for BMemory bus
A64 bit
Bno data
no data for BMemory bandwidth
A14.4 GB/s
Bno data
no data for BExcludes cache (Infinity Cache / L2), which affects effective bandwidth differently.
Power and dimensions
Board power
A33 W (TDP)
Bno data
no data for BTGP (NVIDIA) and TBP (AMD/Intel) are calculated differently; higher is not better. For laptops, the chip maker sets the range and the laptop maker picks the value, so the same chip behaves differently in different laptops.
Interface
APCIe 3.0 x16
Bno data
no data for B
“More” does not always mean “better”: higher power draw or size is a system requirement, not an advantage (such bars are dimmed).
Compare with AI
An AI model reviews the specs and benchmarks of this pair and gives a plain-language verdict on who each model suits.
Questions and answers
How much video memory do NVIDIA GeForce 920M and NVIDIA GeForce 930MX have?
NVIDIA GeForce 920M: 2 GB DDR3, 64-bit bus. NVIDIA GeForce 930MX: 2 GB.
See also
Data sources (2)
- Wikipedia (English) — specifications of NVIDIA GeForce 920M, specifications of NVIDIA GeForce 930MX, release date and launch pricechecked November 14, 2026
- Blender Open Data (Blender Foundation) — benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81a, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.82, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.83, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.90, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.91.2, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.93.1, benchmark Blender Benchmark 2.81, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.6.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.0.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.1.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 3.4.0, benchmark Blender Benchmark 4.5.0checked November 14, 2026
How we compare: methodology. Where the data comes from: sources.