GeForce 9600 GSO 512 vs GTX 870M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 870M with GeForce 9600 GSO 512, including specs and performance data.

GTX 870M
2014
6 GB GDDR5, 100 Watt
8.93
+951%

GTX 870M outperforms 9600 GSO 512 by a whopping 951% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking4571098
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.080.09
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameN15P-GTG94
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date12 March 2014 (10 years ago)23 October 2008 (15 years ago)
Current price$403 $75

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 870M has 3322% better value for money than 9600 GSO 512.

Detailed specifications

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 cores134448
CUDA cores134448
Core clock speed941 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed967 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million505 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt90 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate108.315.6 billion/sec
Floating-point performance2,599 gflops156 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 870M and GeForce 9600 GSO 512 compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI Express 2.0, PCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data9" (22.9 cm)
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone6-pin
SLI options+2-way

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount6 GB512 MB
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width192 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedUp to 2500 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth120.0 GB/s57.6 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 ConnectorsNo outputsTwo Dual Link DVIHDTV
Multi monitor supportno data+
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI++
HDCP content protection+no data
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+no data
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+no data

Supported technologies

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

H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+no data
Optimus+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.52.1
OpenCL1.11.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
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.

GTX 870M 8.93
+951%
9600 GSO 512 0.85

GTX 870M outperforms 9600 GSO 512 by 951% based on our aggregate 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%

GTX 870M 3449
+948%
9600 GSO 512 329

GTX 870M outperforms 9600 GSO 512 by 948% in Passmark.

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 HD46
+1050%
4−5
−1050%
4K20
+1900%
1−2
−1900%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+975%
4−5
−975%
Hitman 3 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Battlefield 5 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+975%
4−5
−975%
Hitman 3 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+1300%
2−3
−1300%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Far Cry 5 20−22
+1900%
1−2
−1900%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+975%
4−5
−975%
Horizon Zero Dawn 35−40
+1200%
3−4
−1200%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+1250%
2−3
−1250%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+1150%
2−3
−1150%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Far Cry New Dawn 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 12−14
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Hitman 3 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Metro Exodus 12−14
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+1400%
1−2
−1400%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7 0−1
Hitman 3 5−6 0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 3−4 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9 0−1
Metro Exodus 7−8 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10 0−1

This is how GTX 870M and 9600 GSO 512 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 870M is 1050% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 870M is 1900% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.93 0.85
Recency 12 March 2014 23 October 2008
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 90 Watt

GTX 870M has a 950.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

9600 GSO 512, on the other hand, has 11.1% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 870M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9600 GSO 512 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 870M is a notebook card while GeForce 9600 GSO 512 is a desktop one.


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 870M
GeForce GTX 870M
NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GSO 512
GeForce 9600 GSO 512

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.9 106 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 870M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 60 votes

Rate GeForce 9600 GSO 512 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.