NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM vs AMD Radeon R9 M265X
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM and AMD Radeon R9 M265X 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).
Differences
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM
- Videocard is newer: launch date 1 year(s) 9 month(s) later
- Around 61% higher core clock speed: 924 MHz vs 575 MHz
- Around 52% higher boost clock speed: 950 MHz vs 625 MHz
- 2.4x more texture fill rate: 60.8 GTexel / s vs 25 GTexel / s
- Around 60% higher pipelines: 1024 vs 640
- 2.4x better floating-point performance: 1,946 gflops vs 800.0 gflops
- 4.5x more memory clock speed: 5012 MHz vs 1125 MHz
- 2.8x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 56.869 vs 20.633
- Around 75% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 917.535 vs 525.038
- Around 54% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 3.351 vs 2.169
- Around 1% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 37.323 vs 37.076
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 1 January 2016 vs 21 March 2014 |
| Core clock speed | 924 MHz vs 575 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 950 MHz vs 625 MHz |
| Texture fill rate | 60.8 GTexel / s vs 25 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 1024 vs 640 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,946 gflops vs 800.0 gflops |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz vs 1125 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 56.869 vs 20.633 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 917.535 vs 525.038 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.351 vs 2.169 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 37.323 vs 37.076 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M265X
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- Around 9% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 94.404 vs 86.304
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 94.404 vs 86.304 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM
GPU 2: AMD Radeon R9 M265X
| 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 | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM | AMD Radeon R9 M265X |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 56.869 | 20.633 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 917.535 | 525.038 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.351 | 2.169 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 37.323 | 37.076 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 86.304 | 94.404 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1138 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 210 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 8829 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1972 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1765 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3214 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1972 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1765 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3214 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM | AMD Radeon R9 M265X | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | GM206 | Venus |
| Launch date | 1 January 2016 | 21 March 2014 |
| Place in performance rating | 1174 | 1175 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 950 MHz | 625 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 924 MHz | 575 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 1,946 gflops | 800.0 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 1024 | 640 |
| Texture fill rate | 60.8 GTexel / s | 25 GTexel / s |
| Transistor count | 2,940 million | 1,500 million |
| Compute units | 10 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
| Eyefinity | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 11 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.4 |
| Mantle | ||
| OpenCL | Not Listed | |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 80.19 GB / s | 72 GB/s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5012 MHz | 1125 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| DualGraphics | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| Switchable graphics | ||
| ZeroCore | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 OEM with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce FX 5200 Ultra
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 710M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
NVIDIAGeForce GT 745A
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
AMDRadeon R9 M265X
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
AMDRadeon R5 M430
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950 OEM vs
AMDRadeon 550X Mobile
