NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M vs AMD Radeon HD 8970 OEM
Comparative analysis of NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M and AMD Radeon HD 8970 OEM 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 960M
- Videocard is newer: launch date 2 year(s) 2 month(s) later
- Around 18% higher core clock speed: 1096 MHz vs 925 MHz
- 3.3x lower typical power consumption: 75 Watt vs 250 Watt
- Around 33% higher maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 3 GB
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3714 vs 3583
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3358 vs 3339
- Around 4% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3714 vs 3583
- Around 1% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3358 vs 3339
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 13 March 2015 vs 8 January 2013 |
| Core clock speed | 1096 MHz vs 925 MHz |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt vs 250 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 3 GB |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 vs 3583 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 vs 3339 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 vs 3583 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 vs 3339 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon HD 8970 OEM
- 2.5x more texture fill rate: 118.4 GTexel / s vs 47.04 GTexel / s
- 3.2x more pipelines: 2048 vs 640
- 2.5x better floating-point performance: 3,789 gflops vs 1,505 gflops
- 2.2x more memory clock speed: 5500 MHz vs 2500 MHz
| Texture fill rate | 118.4 GTexel / s vs 47.04 GTexel / s |
| Pipelines | 2048 vs 640 |
| Floating-point performance | 3,789 gflops vs 1,505 gflops |
| Memory clock speed | 5500 MHz vs 2500 MHz |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
GPU 2: AMD Radeon HD 8970 OEM
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M | AMD Radeon HD 8970 OEM |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 3366 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 245 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 10999 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 54.294 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 795.325 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 3.692 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 51.794 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 174.513 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 5264 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3714 | 3583 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3358 | 3339 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 5264 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3714 | 3583 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3358 | 3339 |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1231 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M | AMD Radeon HD 8970 OEM | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | Maxwell | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | GM107 | Tahiti |
| Launch date | 13 March 2015 | 8 January 2013 |
| Place in performance rating | 762 | 764 |
| Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1176 MHz | |
| Core clock speed | 1096 MHz | 925 MHz |
| CUDA cores | 640 | |
| Floating-point performance | 1,505 gflops | 3,789 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 640 | 2048 |
| Texture fill rate | 47.04 GTexel / s | 118.4 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 75 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Transistor count | 1,870 million | 4,313 million |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort |
| DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support | 1 | |
| HDMI | ||
| VGA аnalog display support | 1 | |
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Laptop size | medium sized | |
| Length | 274 mm | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (11_0) | 12.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 3 GB |
| Memory bandwidth | 80 GB / s | 264.0 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 384 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 2500 MHz | 5500 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
Technologies |
||
| Adaptive VSync | ||
| Ansel | ||
| BatteryBoost | ||
| CUDA | ||
| DSR | ||
| GameStream | ||
| GameWorks | ||
| GeForce Experience | ||
| GeForce ShadowPlay | ||
| GPU Boost | ||
| H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder | ||
| Optimus | ||
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M with others
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
ATIRadeon HD 4290 IGP
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
NVIDIATesla C2070
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
AMDRadeon HD 8970 OEM
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 880M
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
AMDRadeon 630
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 960M vs
IntelUHD Graphics 750
