GeForce GTX 1050 vs 950
Aggregated performance score
950 outperforms 1050 by 6% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 348 | 359 |
| Place by popularity | 92 | 18 |
| Value for money | 6.03 | 4.07 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2018) | Pascal (2016−2021) |
| GPU code name | GM206 | N17P-G1 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 20 August 2015 (8 years old) | 25 October 2016 (7 years old) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $159 | $109 |
| Current price | $12.88 (0.1x MSRP) | $211 (1.9x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
GTX 950 has 48% better value for money than GTX 1050.
Technical specs
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 768 | 640 |
| CUDA cores | 768 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 1024 MHz | 1290 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1188 MHz | 1392 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,940 million | 3,300 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 90 Watt | 75 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 97 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 49.2 billion/sec | 58.20 |
| Floating-point performance | 1,825 gflops | 1,862 gflops |
Size and 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).
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 7.938" (20.2 cm) | 5.7" (14.5 cm) |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | 4.38" (11.1 cm) |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 350 Watt | 300 Watt |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pins | None |
| SLI options | + | - |
| SLI | no data | - |
Memory
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 | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 6.6 GB/s | 7008 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 105.6 GB/s | 112 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Video outputs and ports
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 | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | DP 1.4, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI |
| Multi monitor support | 4 displays | + |
| HDMI | + | + |
| HDCP | + | 2.2 |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| G-SYNC support | + | + |
| Audio input for HDMI | Internal | no data |
Technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| GameStream | + | + |
| GeForce ShadowPlay | + | no data |
| GPU Boost | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| GameWorks | + | no data |
| VR Ready | no data | + |
| Ansel | no data | + |
API support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.4 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.5 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | 1.2.131 |
| CUDA | + | + |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
950 outperforms 1050 by 6% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
950 outperforms 1050 by 6% in Passmark.
3DMark 11 Performance GPU
3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
1050 outperforms 950 by 3% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.
3DMark Fire Strike Graphics
Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
1050 outperforms 950 by 9% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
3DMark Cloud Gate GPU
Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
1050 outperforms 950 by 9% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.
GeekBench 5 OpenCL
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.
Benchmark coverage: 9%
1050 outperforms 950 by 4% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.
GeekBench 5 Vulkan
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.
Benchmark coverage: 5%
950 outperforms 1050 by 3% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.
GeekBench 5 CUDA
Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses CUDA API by NVIDIA.
Benchmark coverage: 4%
1050 outperforms 950 by 7% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.
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 | 52
+15.6%
| 45
−15.6%
|
| 1440p | 24−27
+0%
| 24
+0%
|
| 4K | 21
−4.8%
| 22
+4.8%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+5%
|
20−22
−5%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 27−30
−31%
|
38
+31%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
−19.1%
|
56
+19.1%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 35−40
+5.9%
|
34
−5.9%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+5%
|
20−22
−5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+5.9%
|
30−35
−5.9%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 35−40
−7.9%
|
41
+7.9%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+6.5%
|
45−50
−6.5%
|
| Hitman 3 | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24
−34.8%
|
31
+34.8%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27
−7.4%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 24−27
+8.3%
|
24−27
−8.3%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 27−30
+11.5%
|
26
−11.5%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+9.3%
|
43
−9.3%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 35−40
+50%
|
24
−50%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+5%
|
20−22
−5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+5.9%
|
30−35
−5.9%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 35−40
+0%
|
38
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+0%
|
49
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 35−40
+5.7%
|
35−40
−5.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 27−30
+7.4%
|
27−30
−7.4%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+23.5%
|
17
−23.5%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 21−24
+156%
|
9
−156%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 27−30
+20.8%
|
24
−20.8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 38
+0%
|
38
+0%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 24−27
+8.3%
|
24−27
−8.3%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 27−30
+93.3%
|
15
−93.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 21−24
+9.5%
|
21−24
−9.5%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+30.6%
|
36
−30.6%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+5%
|
20−22
−5%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40
+5.9%
|
30−35
−5.9%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 35−40
+8.6%
|
35
−8.6%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+44.1%
|
34
−44.1%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21
+5%
|
20
−5%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 24−27
+8.3%
|
24−27
−8.3%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 20−22
+5.3%
|
18−20
−5.3%
|
| Hitman 3 | 21−24
+5%
|
20−22
−5%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 20−22
+5.3%
|
18−20
−5.3%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−11
+11.1%
|
9−10
−11.1%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 27−30
+3.7%
|
27
−3.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 21−24
+4.8%
|
21−24
−4.8%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 24−27
+0%
|
25
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+8%
|
24−27
−8%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 12−14
+8.3%
|
12−14
−8.3%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−11
+0%
|
10−11
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8
+16.7%
|
6−7
−16.7%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 13
−15.4%
|
15
+15.4%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 8−9
+0%
|
8−9
+0%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 6−7
+0%
|
6−7
+0%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+7.7%
|
12−14
−7.7%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 14−16
+27.3%
|
11
−27.3%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+5.6%
|
18−20
−5.6%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
This is how GTX 950 and GTX 1050 compete in popular games:
- GTX 950 is 15.6% faster than GTX 1050 in 1080p
- GTX 1050 is 0% faster than GTX 950 in 1440p
- GTX 1050 is 4.8% faster than GTX 950 in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 950 is 156% faster than the GTX 1050.
- in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 1050 is 34.8% faster than the GTX 950.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTX 950 is ahead in 49 tests (72%)
- GTX 1050 is ahead in 5 tests (7%)
- there's a draw in 14 tests (21%)
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 13.78 | 13.04 |
| Recency | 20 August 2015 | 25 October 2016 |
| Cost | $159 | $109 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 90 Watt | 75 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between GeForce GTX 950 and GeForce GTX 1050.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
