Radeon R9 M395X vs GeForce GTX 960
Aggregated performance score
GeForce GTX 960 outperforms Radeon R9 M395X by 17% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 318 | 356 |
| Place by popularity | 57 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.17 | no data |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2018) | GCN 3 (2014−2016) |
| GPU code name | GM206 | Amethyst XT |
| Market segment | Desktop | Laptop |
| Release date | 22 January 2015 (9 years ago) | 16 October 2014 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | no data |
| Current price | $440 (2.2x MSRP) | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 cores | 1024 | 2048 |
| CUDA cores | 1024 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 1127 MHz | 723 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1178 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,940 million | 5,000 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 250 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 72 billion/sec | 92.54 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,413 gflops | 2,961 gflops |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on GeForce GTX 960 and Radeon R9 M395X 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 size | no data | large |
| Bus support | PCI Express 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 9.5" (24.1 cm) | no data |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | no data |
| Width | 2-slot | no data |
| Recommended system power (PSU) | 400 Watt | no data |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 6-pins | None |
| 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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 7.0 GB/s | 1250 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 112 GB/s | 160.0 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 Connectors | Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | No outputs |
| Multi monitor support | 4 displays | no data |
| Eyefinity | no data | 1 |
| HDMI | + | no data |
| HDCP | + | no data |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | no data |
| G-SYNC support | + | no data |
| 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.
| AppAcceleration | no data | - |
| Enduro | no data | - |
| FreeSync | no data | 1 |
| HD3D | no data | + |
| PowerTune | no data | + |
| DualGraphics | no data | 1 |
| TrueAudio | no data | + |
| ZeroCore | no data | + |
| Switchable graphics | no data | 1 |
| GameStream | + | no data |
| GeForce ShadowPlay | + | no data |
| GPU Boost | 2.0 | no data |
| GameWorks | + | no data |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | DirectX® 12 |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | Not Listed |
| Vulkan | + | no data |
| Mantle | no data | + |
| CUDA | + | no data |
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.
GeForce GTX 960 outperforms Radeon R9 M395X by 17% based on our aggregated 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%
GeForce GTX 960 outperforms Radeon R9 M395X by 17% in Passmark.
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%
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 | 65
+18.2%
| 55−60
−18.2%
|
| 4K | 29
+20.8%
| 24−27
−20.8%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
+14.3%
|
21−24
−14.3%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 30−35
+17.9%
|
27−30
−17.9%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 27−30
+22.7%
|
21−24
−22.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+15.2%
|
45−50
−15.2%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+14.3%
|
35−40
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
+14.3%
|
21−24
−14.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
+17.1%
|
35−40
−17.1%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 40−45
+19.4%
|
35−40
−19.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+17%
|
45−50
−17%
|
| Hitman 3 | 40−45
+19.4%
|
35−40
−19.4%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 30−35
+17.9%
|
27−30
−17.9%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27
+13%
|
21−24
−13%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 30−35
+17.9%
|
27−30
−17.9%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−33
+20%
|
24−27
−20%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 30−35
+17.9%
|
27−30
−17.9%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 27−30
+22.7%
|
21−24
−22.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+15.2%
|
45−50
−15.2%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 40−45
+14.3%
|
35−40
−14.3%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
+14.3%
|
21−24
−14.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
+17.1%
|
35−40
−17.1%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 40−45
+19.4%
|
35−40
−19.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+17%
|
45−50
−17%
|
| Hitman 3 | 40−45
+19.4%
|
35−40
−19.4%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 30−35
+17.9%
|
27−30
−17.9%
|
| Metro Exodus | 24−27
+14.3%
|
21−24
−14.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 24−27
+13%
|
21−24
−13%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 30−35
+17.9%
|
27−30
−17.9%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 50
+78.6%
|
27−30
−78.6%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−33
+20%
|
24−27
−20%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 30−35
+17.9%
|
27−30
−17.9%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 27−30
+22.7%
|
21−24
−22.7%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 50−55
+15.2%
|
45−50
−15.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 24−27
+14.3%
|
21−24
−14.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 40−45
+17.1%
|
35−40
−17.1%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 40−45
+19.4%
|
35−40
−19.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+17%
|
45−50
−17%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 28
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 30−33
+20%
|
24−27
−20%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 21−24
+21.1%
|
18−20
−21.1%
|
| Hitman 3 | 24−27
+19%
|
21−24
−19%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 21−24
+15.8%
|
18−20
−15.8%
|
| Metro Exodus | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 20−22
+17.6%
|
16−18
−17.6%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 16−18
+14.3%
|
14−16
−14.3%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 12−14
+30%
|
10−11
−30%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 30−35
+22.2%
|
27−30
−22.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+18.2%
|
21−24
−18.2%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 27−30
+20.8%
|
24−27
−20.8%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 30−35
+19.2%
|
24−27
−19.2%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+23.1%
|
12−14
−23.1%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 10−11
+25%
|
8−9
−25%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 10−12
+22.2%
|
9−10
−22.2%
|
| Hitman 3 | 14−16
+16.7%
|
12−14
−16.7%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−12
+10%
|
10−11
−10%
|
| Metro Exodus | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 8−9
+14.3%
|
7−8
−14.3%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10−11
+25%
|
8−9
−25%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16
+25%
|
12−14
−25%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 9−10
+12.5%
|
8−9
−12.5%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 8−9
+33.3%
|
6−7
−33.3%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 16−18
+30.8%
|
12−14
−30.8%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 3−4
+50%
|
2−3
−50%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 12−14
+9.1%
|
10−12
−9.1%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 14−16
+15.4%
|
12−14
−15.4%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 21−24
+22.2%
|
18−20
−22.2%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 6−7
+20%
|
5−6
−20%
|
This is how GTX 960 and R9 M395X compete in popular games:
- GTX 960 is 18.2% faster than R9 M395X in 1080p
- GTX 960 is 20.8% faster than R9 M395X in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 960 is 78.6% faster than the R9 M395X.
All in all, in popular games:
- GTX 960 is ahead in 67 tests (99%)
- there's a draw in 1 test (1%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 15.68 | 13.42 |
| Recency | 22 January 2015 | 16 October 2014 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 120 Watt | 250 Watt |
The GeForce GTX 960 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 M395X in performance tests.
Be aware that GeForce GTX 960 is a desktop card while Radeon R9 M395X is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
