NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 vs AMD Radeon HD 8970M
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 and AMD Radeon HD 8970M 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: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL, 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), 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 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 3 month(s) later
- Around 20% higher core clock speed: 1024 MHz vs 850 MHz
- Around 40% higher boost clock speed: 1188 MHz vs 850 MHz
- Around 11% lower typical power consumption: 90 Watt vs 100 Watt
- Around 38% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 5347 vs 3876
- Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 60.473 vs 57.241
- 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 6803 vs 2521
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3356 vs 2595
- 2.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 6803 vs 2521
- Around 29% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3356 vs 2595
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | 20 August 2015 vs 14 May 2013 |
Core clock speed | 1024 MHz vs 850 MHz |
Boost clock speed | 1188 MHz vs 850 MHz |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 90 Watt vs 100 Watt |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5347 vs 3876 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 60.473 vs 57.241 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6803 vs 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3697 vs 3688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 vs 2595 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6803 vs 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3697 vs 3688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 vs 2595 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 8970M
- Around 46% higher texture fill rate: 72 GTexel / s vs 49.2 billion / sec
- Around 67% higher pipelines: 1280 vs 768
- Around 26% better floating-point performance: 2,304 gflops vs 1,825 gflops
- 2x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 2 GB
- 800x more memory clock speed: 4800 MHz vs 6.6 GB/s
- Around 26% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 807 vs 642
- Around 25% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 20899 vs 16715
- Around 61% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1223.742 vs 758.865
- Around 35% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 5.78 vs 4.279
- 3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 89.306 vs 29.738
- Around 16% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 268.643 vs 231.508
Specifications (specs) | |
Texture fill rate | 72 GTexel / s vs 49.2 billion / sec |
Pipelines | 1280 vs 768 |
Floating-point performance | 2,304 gflops vs 1,825 gflops |
Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 2 GB |
Memory clock speed | 4800 MHz vs 6.6 GB/s |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 807 vs 642 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 20899 vs 16715 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1223.742 vs 758.865 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.78 vs 4.279 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 89.306 vs 29.738 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 268.643 vs 231.508 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8970M
PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench - OpenCL |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
||||
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) |
|
|
Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 | AMD Radeon HD 8970M |
---|---|---|
PassMark - G3D Mark | 5347 | 3876 |
PassMark - G2D Mark | 642 | 807 |
Geekbench - OpenCL | 16715 | 20899 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 60.473 | 57.241 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 758.865 | 1223.742 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 4.279 | 5.78 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 29.738 | 89.306 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 231.508 | 268.643 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 6803 | 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3697 | 3688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3356 | 2595 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 6803 | 2521 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3697 | 3688 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3356 | 2595 |
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 104 | 0 |
Compare specifications (specs)
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 | AMD Radeon HD 8970M | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | GM206 | Neptune |
Launch date | 20 August 2015 | 14 May 2013 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $159 | |
Place in performance rating | 553 | 554 |
Price now | $194.44 | |
Type | Desktop | Desktop |
Value for money (0-100) | 30.06 | |
Design | AMD Radeon HD 8000M Series | |
Technical info |
||
Boost clock speed | 1188 MHz | 850 MHz |
Core clock speed | 1024 MHz | 850 MHz |
CUDA cores | 768 | |
Floating-point performance | 1,825 gflops | 2,304 gflops |
Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
Pipelines | 768 | 1280 |
Texture fill rate | 49.2 billion / sec | 72 GTexel / s |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 90 Watt | 100 Watt |
Transistor count | 2,940 million | 2,800 million |
Compute units | 20 | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
Audio input for HDMI | Internal | |
Display Connectors | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort, Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | No outputs |
G-SYNC support | ||
HDCP | ||
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Length | 7.938" (20.2 cm) | |
Recommended system power (PSU) | 350 Watt | |
SLI options | 2x | |
Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pins | |
Laptop size | large | |
API support |
||
DirectX | 12.0 (12_1) | 11 |
OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 4 GB |
Memory bandwidth | 105.6 GB / s | 153.6 GB/s |
Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 6.6 GB/s | 4800 MHz |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Shared memory | 0 | 0 |
Technologies |
||
3D Vision | ||
Adaptive Vertical Sync | ||
CUDA | ||
GameStream | ||
GameWorks | ||
GeForce Experience | ||
GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
GPU Boost | ||
SLI | ||
Surround | ||
AMD Eyefinity | ||
PowerTune | ||
ZeroCore |