GeForce 9600M GT vs GTS 350M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTS 350M and GeForce 9600M GT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GTS 350M outperforms 9600M GT by a whopping 166% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 1129 | 1292 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 2.41 | 1.10 |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | GT215 | G96C |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 7 January 2010 (15 years ago) | 4 June 2008 (16 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 | 96 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | 500 MHz | 120 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 727 million | 314 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 23 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 16.00 | 8.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.24 TFLOPS | 0.08 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 360 | no data |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 32 | 16 |
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 size | large | medium sized |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | MXM-II | MXM-II |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
| SLI options | + | - |
| MXM Type | MXM 3.0 Type-B | no 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 type | GDDR3 | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 2000 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 51.2 GB/s | 25.6 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 Connectors | DisplayPortLVDSHDMIDual Link DVISingle Link DVIVGA | No outputs |
| HDMI | + | - |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Power management | 8.0 | no data |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 4.1 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | N/A |
| CUDA | + | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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.
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.
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 Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+19.2%
|
24−27
−19.2%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
+64.3%
|
14−16
−64.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
+40%
|
10−11
−40%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+19.2%
|
24−27
−19.2%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
+40%
|
10−11
−40%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 5−6
+66.7%
|
3−4
−66.7%
|
| Hogwarts Legacy | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
+25%
|
4−5
−25%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
+19.2%
|
24−27
−19.2%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
+200%
|
3−4
−200%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 2−3
+100%
|
1−2
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1−2 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 1−2 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
+0%
|
14−16
+0%
|
| Valorant | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTS 350M is 200% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTS 350M is ahead in 21 test (84%)
- there's a draw in 4 tests (16%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.85 | 0.32 |
| Recency | 7 January 2010 | 4 June 2008 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 512 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 28 Watt | 23 Watt |
GTS 350M has a 165.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.
9600M GT, on the other hand, has 21.7% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTS 350M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9600M GT in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
