Radeon R5 M435 vs GeForce 9650M GT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9650M GT and Radeon R5 M435, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

9650M GT
2008
256 MB GDDR3, 23 Watt
0.31

R5 M435 outperforms 9650M by a whopping 526% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1358917
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.09no data
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)
GPU code nameG96CJet
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date19 August 2008 (17 years ago)15 May 2016 (9 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 cores32320
Core clock speed550 MHz780 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1030 MHz
Number of transistors314 million690 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)23 Wattno data
Texture fill rate8.80020.60
Floating-point processing power0.0848 TFLOPS0.6592 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs1620
L1 Cacheno data80 KB
L2 Cache32 KB128 KB

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 sizedno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfaceMXM-IIPCIe 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 typeGDDR3GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount256 MB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz1125 MHz
Memory bandwidth25.6 GB/s36 GB/s
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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Maximum VGA resolution1920x1200no data

API and SDK support

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_1)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmarks

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

9650M GT 0.31
R5 M435 1.94
+526%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

9650M GT 137
Samples: 82
R5 M435 859
+527%
Samples: 60

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%

Full HD
Medium

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
Valorant 24−27
−515%
160−170
+515%

Full HD
High

Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 14−16
−507%
85−90
+507%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Dota 2 10−11
−500%
60−65
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Valorant 24−27
−515%
160−170
+515%

Full HD
Ultra

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Dota 2 10−11
−500%
60−65
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 4−5
−500%
24−27
+500%
Hogwarts Legacy 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 7−8
−471%
40−45
+471%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−500%
30−33
+500%
Valorant 24−27
−515%
160−170
+515%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 0−1 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 3−4
−500%
18−20
+500%

1440p
Ultra

Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 0−1 0−1

4K
High

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−500%
90−95
+500%
Valorant 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

4K
Ultra

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 2−3
−500%
12−14
+500%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.31 1.94
Recency 19 August 2008 15 May 2016
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 2 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm

R5 M435 has a 525.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon R5 M435 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9650M GT in performance tests.

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 9650M GT
GeForce 9650M GT
AMD Radeon R5 M435
Radeon R5 M435

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.


3.7 9 votes

Rate GeForce 9650M GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 116 votes

Rate Radeon R5 M435 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce 9650M GT or Radeon R5 M435, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.