Quadro M600M vs GeForce GTX 950

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 950 with Quadro M600M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 950
2015
2 GB GDDR5, 90 Watt
13.82
+145%

GTX 950 outperforms Quadro M600M by a whopping 145% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking351567
Place by popularity94not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.033.40
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameGM206GM107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Release date20 August 2015 (8 years ago)2 October 2015 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$159 no data
Current price$12.88 (0.1x MSRP)$103

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 950 has 77% better value for money than Quadro M600M.

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 cores768384
CUDA cores768no data
Core clock speed1024 MHz837 MHz
Boost clock speed1188 MHz876 MHz
Number of transistors2,940 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)90 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate49.2 billion/sec14.02
Floating-point performance1,825 gflops863.2 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 950 and Quadro M600M 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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length7.938" (20.2 cm)no data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Recommended system power (PSU)350 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pinsNone
SLI options+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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed6.6 GB/s5012 MHz
Memory bandwidth105.6 GB/s80 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2No outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+no data
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Display Portno data1.2
G-SYNC support+no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+no data
GeForce ShadowPlay+no data
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+no data
Optimusno data+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12
Shader Model6.45.0
OpenGL4.54.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.126+
CUDA+5.0

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 950 13.82
+145%
Quadro M600M 5.64

GeForce GTX 950 outperforms Quadro M600M by 145% 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 950 5338
+145%
Quadro M600M 2177

GeForce GTX 950 outperforms Quadro M600M by 145% 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%

GTX 950 8351
+187%
Quadro M600M 2911

GeForce GTX 950 outperforms Quadro M600M by 187% 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%

GTX 950 6208
+155%
Quadro M600M 2430

GeForce GTX 950 outperforms Quadro M600M by 155% 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%

GTX 950 37454
+103%
Quadro M600M 18491

GeForce GTX 950 outperforms Quadro M600M by 103% 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%

GTX 950 16084
+176%
Quadro M600M 5832

GeForce GTX 950 outperforms Quadro M600M by 176% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

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 HD51
+240%
15
−240%
4K21
+163%
8−9
−163%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24 no data
Battlefield 5 45−50 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 no data
Far Cry 5 30−35 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40 no data
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 no data
Hitman 3 24−27 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60 no data
Metro Exodus 45−50 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24 no data
Battlefield 5 45−50 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 no data
Far Cry 5 30−35 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40 no data
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 no data
Hitman 3 24−27 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60 no data
Metro Exodus 45−50 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 38 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 21−24 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 27−30 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 no data
Far Cry 5 30−35 no data
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 45−50 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40 no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 27−30 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8 no data
Far Cry 5 21−24 no data
Forza Horizon 4 24−27 no data
Hitman 3 16−18 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30 no data
Metro Exodus 24−27 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 24−27 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 8−9 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24 no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11 no data
Hitman 3 10−11 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 no data
Far Cry 5 7−8 no data
Forza Horizon 4 18−20 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16 no data
Metro Exodus 12−14 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14 no data

This is how GTX 950 and Quadro M600M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 950 is 240% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 950 is 163% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.82 5.64
Recency 20 August 2015 2 October 2015
Power consumption (TDP) 90 Watt 30 Watt

The GeForce GTX 950 is our recommended choice as it beats the Quadro M600M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 950 is a desktop card while Quadro M600M is a mobile workstation 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 950
GeForce GTX 950
NVIDIA Quadro M600M
Quadro M600M

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.


4 1966 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 22 votes

Rate Quadro M600M 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.