GeForce FX 5950 Ultra vs GTX 480

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 480 and GeForce FX 5950 Ultra, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 480
2010
1536 MB GDDR5, 250 Watt
10.71
+7040%

GTX 480 outperforms FX 5950 Ultra by a whopping 7040% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4321422
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.67no data
Power efficiency2.950.14
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)Rankine (2003−2005)
GPU code nameGF100NV38
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date26 March 2010 (14 years ago)23 October 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 $499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 480 and FX 5950 Ultra have a nearly equal value for money.

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 cores480no data
Core clock speed700 MHz475 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million135 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt74 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate42.063.800
Floating-point processing power1.345 TFLOPSno data
ROPs484
TMUs608

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).

Bus support16x PCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16AGP 8x
Length267 mm229 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1x Molex
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 typeGDDR5DDR
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB256 MB
Memory bus width384 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1848 MHz (3696 data rate)475 MHz
Memory bandwidth177.4 GB/s30.4 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Multi monitor support+no data
HDMI+-
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)9.0a
Shader Model5.1no data
OpenGL4.22.1
OpenCL1.1N/A
VulkanN/AN/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. 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 480 10.71
+7040%
FX 5950 Ultra 0.15

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 480 4116
+6876%
FX 5950 Ultra 59

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

Counter-Strike 2 20−22 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 20−22 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 27−30 0−1
Metro Exodus 27−30 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30 0−1
Valorant 40−45 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 20−22 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Dota 2 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 40−45 0−1
Fortnite 60−65 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 27−30 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 35−40 0−1
Metro Exodus 27−30 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+8100%
1−2
−8100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 27−30 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35 0−1
Valorant 40−45 0−1
World of Tanks 150−160
+7500%
2−3
−7500%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 20−22 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Dota 2 35−40 0−1
Far Cry 5 40−45 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 40−45 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 27−30 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 80−85
+8100%
1−2
−8100%
Valorant 40−45 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 14−16 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1
World of Tanks 75−80
+7600%
1−2
−7600%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Far Cry 5 24−27 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 24−27 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 16−18 0−1
Metro Exodus 21−24 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16 0−1
Valorant 24−27 0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16 0−1
Dota 2 21−24 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24 0−1
Metro Exodus 6−7 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 14−16 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Dota 2 21−24 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14 0−1
Fortnite 10−12 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 14−16 0−1
Forza Horizon 5 8−9 0−1
Valorant 10−12 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.71 0.15
Recency 26 March 2010 23 October 2003
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 256 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 74 Watt

GTX 480 has a 7040% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 225% more advanced lithography process.

FX 5950 Ultra, on the other hand, has 237.8% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce FX 5950 Ultra in performance tests.


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

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 GTX 480
GeForce GTX 480
NVIDIA GeForce FX 5950 Ultra
GeForce FX 5950 Ultra

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.


3.4 221 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 480 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 76 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.