GTX 960M vs GT 1030

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

GT 1030
6.39

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 37% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking538454
Place by popularity20not in top-100
Value for money2.731.41
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameN17P-G1N16P-GX
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date17 May 2017 (6 years old)12 March 2015 (9 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)$79 no data
Current price$137 (1.7x MSRP)$799
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GT 1030 has 94% better value for money than GTX 960M.

Technical specs

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 cores384640
CUDA coresno data640
Core clock speed1228 MHz1096 MHz
Boost clock speed1670 MHz1202 MHz
Number of transistors1,800 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate35.2347.04
Floating-point performance1,127 gflops1,505 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on GeForce GT 1030 and GeForce GTX 960M 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 datamedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x4MXM-B (3.0)
Length145 mmno data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data
SLI optionsno data+

Memory

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 amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width64 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed6000 MHz2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth48.06 GB/s80 GB/s
Shared memory--

Video outputs and ports

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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMINo outputs
VGA аnalog display supportno data+
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno data+
HDMI++
G-SYNC support+no data

Technologies

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

GameStreamno data+
GeForce ShadowPlayno data+
GPU Boostno data2.0
GameWorksno data+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoderno data+
Optimusno data+
BatteryBoostno data+
VR Ready+no data
Anselno data+

API support

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.1.126
CUDA6.1+

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.

GT 1030 6.39
GTX 960M 8.77
+37.2%

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 37% in our combined 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%

GT 1030 2475
GTX 960M 3400
+37.4%

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 37% 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%

GT 1030 4728
GTX 960M 5278
+11.6%

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 12% 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%

GT 1030 3625
GTX 960M 4318
+19.1%

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 19% 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%

GT 1030 22069
GTX 960M 30086
+36.3%

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 36% 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%

GT 1030 9650
GTX 960M 10646
+10.3%

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 10% in GeekBench 5 OpenCL.

3DMark Ice Storm GPU

Ice Storm Graphics is an obsolete benchmark, part of 3DMark suite. Ice Storm was used to measure entry level laptops and Windows-based tablets performance. It utilizes DirectX 11 feature level 9 to display a battle between two space fleets near a frozen planet in 1280x720 resolution. Discontinued in January 2020, it is now superseded by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 8%

GT 1030 219163
GTX 960M 226308
+3.3%

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 3% in 3DMark Ice Storm GPU.

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

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 Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Benchmark coverage: 5%

GT 1030 9200
+3.4%
GTX 960M 8898

GT 1030 outperforms GTX 960M by 3% in GeekBench 5 Vulkan.

GeekBench 5 CUDA

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 CUDA API by NVIDIA.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GT 1030 10307
GTX 960M 11818
+14.7%

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 15% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GT 1030 33
+114%
GTX 960M 15

GT 1030 outperforms GTX 960M by 114% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 maya-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GT 1030 25
+306%
GTX 960M 6

GT 1030 outperforms GTX 960M by 306% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 sw-03.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GT 1030 3
+100%
GTX 960M 2

GT 1030 outperforms GTX 960M by 100% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 snx-02.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GT 1030 18
+15.2%
GTX 960M 16

GT 1030 outperforms GTX 960M by 15% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 catia-04.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GT 1030 12
GTX 960M 35
+196%

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 196% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 creo-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GT 1030 10
+321%
GTX 960M 2

GT 1030 outperforms GTX 960M by 321% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 mediacal-01.

SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01

Benchmark coverage: 3%

GT 1030 1
GTX 960M 18
+3480%

GTX 960M outperforms GT 1030 by 3480% in SPECviewperf 12 - specvp12 energy-01.

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:

900p65−70
−46.2%
95
+46.2%
Full HD25
−44%
36
+44%
1440p21
+40%
15
−40%
4K9
−44.4%
13
+44.4%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 15
+7.1%
14−16
−7.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 18
−38.9%
25
+38.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Battlefield 5 31
−22.6%
38
+22.6%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 23
−4.3%
24−27
+4.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 11
−27.3%
14−16
+27.3%
Far Cry 5 19
−47.4%
28
+47.4%
Far Cry New Dawn 23
−17.4%
27
+17.4%
Forza Horizon 4 27
−29.6%
35
+29.6%
Hitman 3 22
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 15
−20%
18−20
+20%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 17
−41.2%
24
+41.2%
Watch Dogs: Legion 13
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12
−58.3%
19
+58.3%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Battlefield 5 26
−19.2%
31
+19.2%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 18−20
−26.3%
24−27
+26.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 7
−100%
14−16
+100%
Far Cry 5 17
−47.1%
25
+47.1%
Far Cry New Dawn 22
−13.6%
25
+13.6%
Forza Horizon 4 24
−29.2%
31
+29.2%
Hitman 3 16
−37.5%
21−24
+37.5%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12
−50%
18−20
+50%
Metro Exodus 7
−71.4%
12
+71.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
−25%
14−16
+25%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12
−58.3%
19
+58.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21
−14.3%
24
+14.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12
−25%
14−16
+25%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7
−57.1%
11
+57.1%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
−62.5%
12−14
+62.5%
Battlefield 5 20
−30%
26
+30%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Far Cry 5 15
−53.3%
23
+53.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 18
−27.8%
23
+27.8%
Forza Horizon 4 16
−56.3%
25
+56.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12
−16.7%
14
+16.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6
−150%
14−16
+150%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
−30%
12−14
+30%
Hitman 3 10−11
−40%
14−16
+40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−15.4%
14−16
+15.4%
Metro Exodus 5−6
−40%
7−8
+40%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 9−10
−22.2%
11
+22.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−60%
8
+60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−300%
4−5
+300%
Battlefield 5 5−6
−240%
17
+240%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−50%
15
+50%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−87.5%
15
+87.5%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−80%
18
+80%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
−100%
4−5
+100%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−50%
6−7
+50%
Hitman 3 6−7
−33.3%
8−9
+33.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
−200%
3−4
+200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−66.7%
5−6
+66.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2
−100%
4−5
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
−233%
10
+233%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1
−400%
5−6
+400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Battlefield 5 1
−200%
3
+200%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−16.7%
7
+16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+33.3%
6
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 7
−42.9%
10−11
+42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

This is how GT 1030 and GTX 960M compete in popular games:

900p resolution:

  • GTX 960M is 46.2% faster than GT 1030

1080p resolution:

  • GTX 960M is 44% faster than GT 1030

1440p resolution:

  • GT 1030 is 40% faster than GTX 960M

4K resolution:

  • GTX 960M is 44.4% faster than GT 1030

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Far Cry New Dawn, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GT 1030 is 33.3% faster than the GTX 960M.
  • in Assassin's Creed Odyssey, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the GTX 960M is 400% faster than the GT 1030.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 1030 is ahead in 2 tests (3%)
  • GTX 960M is ahead in 63 tests (93%)
  • there's a draw in 3 tests (4%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 6.39 8.77
Recency 17 May 2017 12 March 2015
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 75 Watt

The GeForce GTX 960M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 1030 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 1030 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 960M is a notebook one.


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

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030
GeForce GT 1030
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M
GeForce GTX 960M

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 6933 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 902 votes

Rate NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

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