NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 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 950M

• Videocard is newer: launch date 3 year(s) 9 month(s) later
• Around 13% higher core clock speed: 914 MHz vs 810 MHz
• Around 90% higher pipelines: 640 vs 336
• Around 32% better floating-point performance: 1,439 gflops vs 1,088.6 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 2x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 150 Watt
• 4x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 6% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 9543 vs 9022
• Around 64% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 42.396 vs 25.814
• Around 23% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.54 vs 2.063
• Around 30% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 39.412 vs 30.402
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.158 vs 62.233
• Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4148 vs 3754
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 3667
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3332
• Around 10% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4148 vs 3754
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 3667
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3332

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560

• Around 1% higher texture fill rate: 45.4 GTexel / s vs 44.96 GTexel / s
• Around 60% higher memory clock speed: 4000 MHz vs 1000 or 2500 MHz
• Around 6% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 2737 vs 2586
• Around 98% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 427 vs 216
• Around 67% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 623.187 vs 373.644

Compare benchmarks

GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2586 2737
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	216 427
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	9543 9022
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	42.396 25.814
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	373.644 623.187
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.54 2.063
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	39.412 30.402
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	139.158 62.233
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4148 3754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3667
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3332
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4148 3754
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3667
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3332

Compare specifications (specs)