AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 OEM
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 OEM videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: 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, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- Around 49% higher texture fill rate: 114.2 GTexel / s vs 76.86 GTexel / s
- Around 50% higher pipelines: 1536 vs 1024
- Around 49% better floating-point performance: 3,656 gflops vs 2,460 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 14 nm vs 28 nm
| Launch date | 1 February 2018 vs 26 November 2015 |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 GTexel / s vs 76.86 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1536 vs 1024 |
| Floating-point performance | 3,656 gflops vs 2,460 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 28 nm |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 OEM
- Around 11% higher core clock speed: 1176 MHz vs 1063 MHz
- Around 1% higher boost clock speed: 1201 MHz vs 1190 MHz
- 4.4x more memory clock speed: 7012 MHz vs 1600 MHz
| Core clock speed | 1176 MHz vs 1063 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1201 MHz vs 1190 MHz |
| Memory clock speed | 7012 MHz vs 1600 MHz |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 OEM
| Name | AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 6581 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 773 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 27108 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8931 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3351 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8931 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3351 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 2911 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 76.687 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 890.785 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 28.659 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon RX Vega M GH | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 OEM | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 4.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Code name | Polaris 22 | GM206 |
| Launch date | 1 February 2018 | 26 November 2015 |
| Place in performance rating | 325 | 978 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1190 MHz | 1201 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 1063 MHz | 1176 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 3,656 gflops | 2,460 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1536 | 1024 |
| Texture fill rate | 114.2 GTexel / s | 76.86 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 100 Watt | |
| Transistor count | 2,940 million | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 12.0 (12_1) |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 204.8 GB / s | 112.2 GB / s |
| Memory clock speed | 1600 MHz | 7012 MHz |
| Memory type | HBM2 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | |
