G92 vs G96C
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | G96C | G92 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | no data | no data |
| Current price | no data | $75 |
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 32 | 128 |
| Number of transistors | 314 million | 754 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 65 nm |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| PureVideo HD | VP3 | VP2 |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | 1.1 | 1.1 |
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 65 nm |
G96C has a 18.2% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between G96C and G92. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
