RTX A5000 Mobile vs GeForce FX 5950 Ultra

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce FX 5950 Ultra with RTX A5000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

FX 5950 Ultra
2003, $499
256 MB DDR, 74 Watt
0.14

RTX A5000 Mobile outperforms 5950 Ultra by a whopping 27729% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1483126
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency0.1519.94
ArchitectureRankine (2003−2005)Ampere (2020−2025)
GPU code nameNV38GA104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date23 October 2003 (22 years ago)12 April 2021 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 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

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 coresno data6144
Core clock speed475 MHz900 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1575 MHz
Number of transistors135 million17,400 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)74 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate3.800302.4
Floating-point processing powerno data19.35 TFLOPS
ROPs496
TMUs8192
Tensor Coresno data192
Ray Tracing Coresno data48
L1 Cacheno data6 MB
L2 Cacheno data4 MB

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 datalarge
InterfaceAGP 8xPCIe 4.0 x16
Length229 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x Molexno data

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 typeDDRGDDR6
Maximum RAM amount256 MB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed475 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth30.4 GB/s448.0 GB/s
Shared memoryno data-
Resizable BAR-+

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-VideoPortable Device Dependent

API and SDK support

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

DirectX9.0a12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Modelno data6.7
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCLN/A3.0
VulkanN/A1.3
CUDA-8.6
DLSS-+

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.

FX 5950 Ultra 0.14
RTX A5000 Mobile 38.96
+27729%

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.

FX 5950 Ultra 59
Samples: 3
RTX A5000 Mobile 16302
+27531%
Samples: 347

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 HD-0−1106
1440p-0−168
4K-0−148

Cost per frame, $

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low

Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

Full HD
Medium

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 93
+0%
93
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

Full HD
High

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 210−220
+0%
210−220
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Dota 2 132
+0%
132
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 90
+0%
90
+0%
Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 122
+0%
122
+0%
Metro Exodus 80
+0%
80
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150
+0%
150
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

Full HD
Ultra

Battlefield 5 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Dota 2 124
+0%
124
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Far Cry 5 85
+0%
85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 90
+0%
90
+0%
Valorant 220−230
+0%
220−230
+0%

Full HD
Epic

Fortnite 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%

1440p
High

Counter-Strike 2 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 82
+0%
82
+0%
Metro Exodus 44
+0%
44
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

1440p
Ultra

Battlefield 5 100−105
+0%
100−105
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Far Cry 5 79
+0%
79
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
Epic

Fortnite 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

4K
High

Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 76
+0%
76
+0%
Metro Exodus 26
+0%
26
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 58
+0%
58
+0%
Valorant 240−250
+0%
240−250
+0%

4K
Ultra

Battlefield 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Dota 2 107
+0%
107
+0%
Escape from Tarkov 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 44
+0%
44
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

4K
Epic

Fortnite 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.14 38.96
Recency 23 October 2003 12 April 2021
Maximum RAM amount 256 MB 16 GB
Chip lithography 130 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 74 Watt 150 Watt

FX 5950 Ultra has 102.7% lower power consumption.

RTX A5000 Mobile, on the other hand, has a 27728.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 17 years, a 6300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 1525% more advanced lithography process.

The RTX A5000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5950 Ultra in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce FX 5950 Ultra is a desktop graphics card while RTX A5000 Mobile is a mobile workstation one.

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 FX 5950 Ultra
GeForce FX 5950 Ultra
NVIDIA RTX A5000 Mobile
RTX A5000 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.


3.5 80 votes

Rate GeForce FX 5950 Ultra on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 71 votes

Rate RTX A5000 Mobile on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce FX 5950 Ultra or RTX A5000 Mobile, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.