GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile vs 9500M G

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9500M G and GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

9500M G
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 20 Watt
0.31

RTX 2050 Mobile outperforms 9500M G by a whopping 5939% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1319298
Place by popularitynot in top-10017
Power efficiency1.0728.64
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameG96GA107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 June 2008 (16 years ago)17 December 2021 (3 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 cores162048
Core clock speed500 MHz1185 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1477 MHz
Number of transistors314 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology65 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)20 Watt45 Watt
Texture fill rate4.00094.53
Floating-point processing power0.04 TFLOPS6.05 TFLOPS
Gigaflops60no data
ROPs832
TMUs864
Tensor Coresno data256
Ray Tracing Coresno data32

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 sizemedium sizedlarge
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8

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 typeGDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount512 MB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s112.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.1, 2x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI-+
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

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

VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.6
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.13.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA+8.6

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:

Full HD0−142
1440p0−133
4K-0−125

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−350%
36
+350%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−2350%
49
+2350%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−275%
30
+275%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−950%
21
+950%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1420%
76
+1420%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1000%
40−45
+1000%

Full HD
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−238%
27
+238%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−650%
15
+650%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1067%
70
+1067%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1160%
63
+1160%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2033%
120−130
+2033%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1000%
40−45
+1000%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−1060%
55−60
+1060%
World of Tanks 12−14
−1615%
220−230
+1615%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9
−313%
30−35
+313%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−550%
13
+550%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−967%
60−65
+967%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
−1020%
56
+1020%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
−2033%
120−130
+2033%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−8250%
160−170
+8250%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
−77.8%
16−18
+77.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−650%
14−16
+650%
Far Cry 5 4−5
−1125%
45−50
+1125%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1150%
24−27
+1150%
Valorant 5−6
−860%
45−50
+860%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16
−113%
30−35
+113%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−113%
30−35
+113%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−5500%
55−60
+5500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−113%
30−35
+113%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 18−20
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Dota 2 14−16
−127%
34
+127%
Valorant 1−2
−2100%
21−24
+2100%

Full HD
Low Preset

Elden Ring 43
+0%
43
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 87
+0%
87
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Dota 2 85
+0%
85
+0%
Elden Ring 59
+0%
59
+0%
Fortnite 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 69
+0%
69
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Valorant 43
+0%
43
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Dota 2 110
+0%
110
+0%
Valorant 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 37
+0%
37
+0%
Elden Ring 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 37
+0%
37
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
World of Tanks 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 47
+0%
47
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Elden Ring 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 2050 Mobile is 8250% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • RTX 2050 Mobile is ahead in 32 tests (52%)
  • there's a draw in 30 tests (48%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.31 18.72
Recency 3 June 2008 17 December 2021
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 20 Watt 45 Watt

9500M G has 125% lower power consumption.

RTX 2050 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 5938.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 712.5% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9500M G in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce 9500M G
GeForce 9500M G
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile
GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile

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.


1 1 vote

Rate GeForce 9500M G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 2327 votes

Rate GeForce RTX 2050 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.