Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 vs GeForce 7190M
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Architecture | no data | Gen. 3 (2005) |
| GPU code name | no data | GMA 950 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 1 February 2006 (18 years ago) | 1 March 2005 (19 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 3 | 4 |
| Core clock speed | 1 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 250 MHz |
| Manufacturing process technology | 90 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 7 Watt |
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 type | shared Memory | no data |
| Shared memory | + | - |
API compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | shared Memory | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 February 2006 | 1 March 2005 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 130 nm |
GeForce 7190M has an age advantage of 11 months, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between GeForce 7190M and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950. 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.
