GeForce GTX 960M vs GTX 295

Place in the ranking	757	493
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.14	no data
Power efficiency	0.75	8.07
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code name	GT200B	GM107
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	8 January 2009 (16 years ago)	13 March 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$500	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	480	640
CUDA cores per GPU	240	no data
Core clock speed	576 MHz	1096 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1176 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology	55 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	289 Watt	75 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	46.08	47.04
Floating-point processing power	0.5962 TFLOPS	1.505 TFLOPS
ROPs	28	16
TMUs	80	40

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	no data	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	MXM-B (3.0)
Length	267 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	no data
SLI options	+	+

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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1792 MB	4 GB
Standard memory config per GPU	896 MB	no data
Memory bus width	896 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	999 MHz	2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	223.8 GB/s	80 GB/s
Memory interface width per GPU	448 Bit	no data
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	Two Dual Link DVIHDMI	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
VGA аnalog display support	no data	+
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	no data	+
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)	128bit	no data
GameStream	-	+
GeForce ShadowPlay	-	+
GPU Boost	no data	2.0
GameWorks	-	+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	-	+
Optimus	-	+
BatteryBoost	-	+
Ansel	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	4.0	5.1
OpenGL	2.1	4.5
OpenCL	1.1	1.2
Vulkan	N/A	1.1.126
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. 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.

GTX 295 3.14

GTX 960M 8.77
+179%

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.

GTX 295 1206

GTX 960M 3372
+180%

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:

900p	30−35 −217%	95 +217%
Full HD	12−14 −192%	35 +192%
1440p	5−6 −200%	15 +200%
4K	5−6 −180%	14 +180%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	41.67	no data
1440p	100.00	no data
4K	100.00	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Elden Ring	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	23 +0%	23 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	27 +0%	27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	25 +0%	25 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Dota 2	21 +0%	21 +0%
Elden Ring	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Fortnite	36 +0%	36 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	31 +0%	31 +0%
Metro Exodus	17 +0%	17 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	99 +0%	99 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	28 +0%	28 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
World of Tanks	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	20 +0%	20 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Dota 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	20 +0%	20 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Elden Ring	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
World of Tanks	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14 +0%	14 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	15 +0%	15 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	20 +0%	20 +0%
Elden Ring	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	20 +0%	20 +0%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24 +0%	24 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 +0%	20 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6 +0%	6 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Fortnite	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Valorant	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

This is how GTX 295 and GTX 960M compete in popular games:

GTX 960M is 217% faster in 900p
GTX 960M is 192% faster in 1080p
GTX 960M is 200% faster in 1440p
GTX 960M is 180% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.14	8.77
Recency	8 January 2009	13 March 2015
Maximum RAM amount	1792 MB	4 GB
Chip lithography	55 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	289 Watt	75 Watt

GTX 960M has a 179.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 128.6% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 285.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 960M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 295 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 295 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 960M is a notebook one.

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