AMD Radeon E8950 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon E8950 and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon E8950
- Videocard is newer: launch date 6 month(s) later
- 2.7x more texture fill rate: 128.0 GTexel / s vs 47.04 GTexel / s
- 3.2x more pipelines: 2048 vs 640
- 2.7x better floating-point performance: 4,096 gflops vs 1,505 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 8 GB vs 4 GB
- 2.4x more memory clock speed: 6000 MHz vs 2500 MHz
- Around 23% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 66.837 vs 54.294
- Around 72% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1369.722 vs 795.325
- Around 80% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 6.633 vs 3.692
- Around 27% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 65.836 vs 51.794
- Around 87% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 326.391 vs 174.513
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 29 September 2015 vs 13 March 2015 |
Texture fill rate | 128.0 GTexel / s vs 47.04 GTexel / s |
Pipelines | 2048 vs 640 |
Floating-point performance | 4,096 gflops vs 1,505 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 8 GB vs 4 GB |
Memory clock speed | 6000 MHz vs 2500 MHz |
Benchmarks | |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 66.837 vs 54.294 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1369.722 vs 795.325 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.633 vs 3.692 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.836 vs 51.794 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 326.391 vs 174.513 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
- Around 49% higher core clock speed: 1096 MHz vs 735 MHz
- Around 18% higher boost clock speed: 1176 MHz vs 1000 MHz
- Around 27% lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 95 Watt
Core clock speed | 1096 MHz vs 735 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1176 MHz vs 1000 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 95 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon E8950
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
Name | AMD Radeon E8950 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M |
---|---|---|
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 66.837 | 54.294 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1369.722 | 795.325 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.633 | 3.692 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 65.836 | 51.794 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 326.391 | 174.513 |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 3374 | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 245 | |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 10982 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5264 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5264 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1231 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Radeon E8950 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Maxwell |
Code name | Amethyst | GM107 |
Launch date | 29 September 2015 | 13 March 2015 |
Place in performance rating | 771 | 772 |
Type | Desktop | Laptop |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1000 MHz | 1176 MHz |
Core clock speed | 735 MHz | 1096 MHz |
Floating-point performance | 4,096 gflops | 1,505 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 2048 | 640 |
Texture fill rate | 128.0 GTexel / s | 47.04 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 75 Watt |
Transistor count | 5,000 million | 1,870 million |
CUDA cores | 640 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | 1 | |
HDMI | ||
VGA аnalog display support | 1 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | MXM-B (3.0) |
Supplementary power connectors | None | |
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (11_0) |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 8 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 192.0 GB / s | 80 GB / s |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 6000 MHz | 2500 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
Adaptive VSync | ||
Ansel | ||
BatteryBoost | ||
CUDA | ||
DSR | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
Optimus | ||
SLI |