GeForce 6150 LE vs GTX 960

Place in the ranking	342	1466
Place by popularity	53	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	9.16	no data
Power efficiency	9.11	no data
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code name	GM206	C51
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	22 January 2015 (9 years ago)	11 October 2004 (20 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	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	1024	no data
Core clock speed	1127 MHz	425 MHz
Boost clock speed	1178 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,940 million	no data
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	75.39	0.43
Floating-point processing power	2.413 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	1
TMUs	64	1

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 support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCI
Length	241 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	IGP
Recommended system power (PSU)	400 Watt	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-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	GDDR5	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	128 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	7.0 GB/s	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	112 GB/s	no data
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 Connectors	Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2	No outputs
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
G-SYNC support	+	-
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream	+	-
GeForce ShadowPlay	+	-
GPU Boost	2.0	no data
GameWorks	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	9.0c (9_3)
Shader Model	6.4	3.0
OpenGL	4.4	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	N/A
Vulkan	+	N/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 960 15.85
+17511%

6150 LE 0.09

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 960 6095
+18370%

6150 LE 33

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	62	-0−1
4K	30	-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.21	no data
4K	6.63	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	27−30	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35	0−1
Elden Ring	45−50	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	27−30	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	65−70	0−1
Metro Exodus	40−45	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40	0−1
Valorant	60−65	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	27−30	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35	0−1
Dota 2	33	0−1
Elden Ring	45−50	0−1
Far Cry 5	55−60	0−1
Fortnite	85−90	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	65−70	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	49	0−1
Metro Exodus	40−45	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	49	0−1
Valorant	60−65	0−1
World of Tanks	200−210 +20000%	1−2 −20000%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	50−55	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	27−30	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	30−35	0−1
Dota 2	55−60	0−1
Far Cry 5	55−60	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	65−70	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	110−120	0−1
Valorant	60−65	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	21−24	0−1
Elden Ring	24−27	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	24−27	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	140−150	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	14−16	0−1
World of Tanks	110−120	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−35	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	12−14	0−1
Far Cry 5	35−40	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	35−40	0−1
Metro Exodus	35−40	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20−22	0−1
Valorant	40−45	0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−12	0−1
Dota 2	27−30	0−1
Elden Ring	10−12	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	27−30	0−1
Metro Exodus	10−12	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	45−50	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	10−11	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14−16	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−12	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5	0−1
Dota 2	27−30	0−1
Far Cry 5	20−22	0−1
Fortnite	18−20	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	21−24	0−1
Valorant	18−20	0−1