NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti

Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti 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 4 year(s) 1 month(s) later
• Around 11% higher core clock speed: 914 MHz vs 823 MHz
• Around 67% higher pipelines: 640 vs 384
• Around 14% better floating-point performance: 1,439 gflops vs 1,263.4 gflops
• A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 40 nm
• 2.3x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 170 Watt
• 4x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1 GB
• Around 33% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 42.396 vs 31.935
• Around 8% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 2.54 vs 2.344
• Around 10% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 39.412 vs 35.841
• 2.2x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 139.158 vs 64.308
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3715 vs 3683
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3333
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3715 vs 3683
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3333
• 8.6x better performance in 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score: 3350 vs 389

Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti

• Around 17% higher texture fill rate: 52.7 GTexel / s vs 44.96 GTexel / s
• Around 60% higher memory clock speed: 4008 MHz vs 1000 or 2500 MHz
• Around 19% better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 3060 vs 2580
• 2x better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 436 vs 217
• Around 10% better performance in Geekbench - OpenCL: 10720 vs 9741
• Around 45% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 539.966 vs 373.644
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 4184 vs 4148
• Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 4184 vs 4148

Compare benchmarks

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

PassMark - G3D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	2580 3060
PassMark - G2D Mark	GPU 1 GPU 2	217 436
Geekbench - OpenCL	GPU 1 GPU 2	9741 10720
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	42.396 31.935
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	373.644 539.966
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	2.54 2.344
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	39.412 35.841
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s)	GPU 1 GPU 2	139.158 64.308
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4148 4184
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3683
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3333
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	4148 4184
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3715 3683
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps)	GPU 1 GPU 2	3358 3333
3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score	GPU 1 GPU 2	3350 389

Compare specifications (specs)