GeForce GTS 250 vs GTX 960M

Place in the ranking	494	974
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	no data	0.09
Power efficiency	8.06	0.71
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GM107	G92B
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	13 March 2015 (9 years ago)	4 March 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$199

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	640	128
Core clock speed	1096 MHz	738 MHz
Boost clock speed	1176 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,870 million	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	150 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105 °C
Texture fill rate	47.04	44.93
Floating-point processing power	1.505 TFLOPS	0.3871 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	40	64

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).

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	229 mm
Height	no data	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width	no data	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	1x 6-pin
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	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	2500 MHz	1100 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	70.4 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	No outputs	Two Dual Link DVI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
VGA аnalog display support	+	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF

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

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	3.0
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	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 960M 8.77
+469%

GTS 250 1.54

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 960M 3371
+469%

GTS 250 592

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:

900p	95 +494%	16−18 −494%
Full HD	35 +483%	6−7 −483%
1440p	15 +650%	2−3 −650%
4K	14 +600%	2−3 −600%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	no data	33.17
1440p	no data	99.50
4K	no data	99.50

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	23 +475%	4−5 −475%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +483%	6−7 −483%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
Metro Exodus	27 +575%	4−5 −575%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
Valorant	30−35 +560%	5−6 −560%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	25 +525%	4−5 −525%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Dota 2	21 +600%	3−4 −600%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +517%	6−7 −517%
Fortnite	36 +500%	6−7 −500%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +483%	6−7 −483%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
Grand Theft Auto V	31 +520%	5−6 −520%
Metro Exodus	17 +750%	2−3 −750%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	99 +519%	16−18 −519%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +500%	4−5 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	28 +600%	4−5 −600%
Valorant	30−35 +560%	5−6 −560%
World of Tanks	130−140 +519%	21−24 −519%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	20 +567%	3−4 −567%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +700%	2−3 −700%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +500%	3−4 −500%
Dota 2	30−35 +520%	5−6 −520%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +517%	6−7 −517%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +483%	6−7 −483%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +600%	3−4 −600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	20 +567%	3−4 −567%
Valorant	30−35 +560%	5−6 −560%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +514%	7−8 −514%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
World of Tanks	60−65 +530%	10−11 −530%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	14 +600%	2−3 −600%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +520%	5−6 −520%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +600%	1−2 −600%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 +550%	2−3 −550%
Metro Exodus	15 +650%	2−3 −650%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +500%	2−3 −500%
Valorant	21−24 +633%	3−4 −633%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Dota 2	20 +567%	3−4 −567%
Grand Theft Auto V	20 +567%	3−4 −567%
Metro Exodus	4−5	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24 +500%	4−5 −500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	20 +567%	3−4 −567%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	6 +500%	1−2 −500%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4	0−1
Dota 2	18−20 +533%	3−4 −533%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Fortnite	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +1000%	1−2 −1000%
Forza Horizon 5	6−7 +500%	1−2 −500%
Valorant	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%

This is how GTX 960M and GTS 250 compete in popular games:

GTX 960M is 494% faster in 900p
GTX 960M is 483% faster in 1080p
GTX 960M is 650% faster in 1440p
GTX 960M is 600% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.77	1.54
Recency	13 March 2015	4 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	150 Watt

GTX 960M has a 469.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 960M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTS 250 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 960M is a notebook card while GeForce GTS 250 is a desktop one.

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