GeForce GT 650M SLI vs GTX 295

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 295 with GeForce GT 650M SLI, including specs and performance data.

GTX 295
2009, $500
1792 MB GDDR3, 289 Watt
2.93

650M SLI outperforms GTX 295 by an impressive 59% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking833708
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.13no data
Power efficiency0.79no data
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGT200BN13E-GE
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date8 January 2009 (17 years ago)22 March 2012 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$500 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Currently popular graphics cards are shown for comparison.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores480 ×2768
CUDA cores per GPU240no data
Core clock speed576 MHz790 MHz
Boost clock speedno data835 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)289 Wattno data
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate46.08 ×2no data
Floating-point processing power0.5962 TFLOPS ×2no data
ROPs28 ×2no data
TMUs80 ×2no data
L2 Cache224 KBno data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizeno datamedium sized
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1792 MB ×22x2 GB
Standard memory config per GPU896 MBno data
Memory bus width896 Bit ×22x 128 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz4000 MHz
Memory bandwidth223.8 GB/s ×2no data
Memory interface width per GPU448 Bitno data
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.

Display ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIHDMIno data
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)128bitno data
Optimus-+

API and SDK support

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX11.1 (10_0)11
Shader Model4.0no data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCL1.1no data
VulkanN/A-
CUDA++

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

900p45−50
−75.6%
79
+75.6%
Full HD30−35
−66.7%
50
+66.7%

Cost per frame, $

1080p16.67no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Resident Evil 4 Remake 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High

Atomic Heart 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 139
+0%
139
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Dota 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
High

Atomic Heart 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how GTX 295 and GT 650M SLI compete in popular games:

  • GT 650M SLI is 76% faster in 900p
  • GT 650M SLI is 67% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 59 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.93 4.66
Recency 8 January 2009 22 March 2012
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm

GT 650M SLI has a 59% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 96% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce GT 650M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 295 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 295 is a desktop graphics card while GeForce GT 650M SLI is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 93 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 295 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 28 votes

Rate GeForce GT 650M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 295 or GeForce GT 650M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.