RTX A2000 vs GeForce GTX 960M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 960M with RTX A2000, including specs and performance data.

GTX 960M
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 75 Watt
8.77

RTX A2000 outperforms GTX 960M by a whopping 305% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking492141
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data88.49
Power efficiency8.0735.03
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2017)Ampere (2020−2024)
GPU code nameGM107GA106
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date13 March 2015 (9 years ago)10 August 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$449

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 cores6403328
Core clock speed1096 MHz562 MHz
Boost clock speed1176 MHz1200 MHz
Number of transistors1,870 million12,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)75 Watt70 Watt
Texture fill rate47.04124.8
Floating-point processing power1.505 TFLOPS7.987 TFLOPS
ROPs1648
TMUs40104
Tensor Coresno data104
Ray Tracing Coresno data26

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfaceMXM-B (3.0)PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data167 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit192 Bit
Memory clock speed2500 MHz1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth80 GB/s288.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x mini-DisplayPort 1.4a
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no 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.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.8
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.23.0
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA+8.6

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
RTX A2000 35.54
+305%

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 3372
RTX A2000 13664
+305%

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.

GTX 960M 5278
RTX A2000 19978
+279%

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.

GTX 960M 4318
RTX A2000 14934
+246%

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.

GTX 960M 30086
RTX A2000 94407
+214%

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.

GTX 960M 10976
RTX A2000 73356
+568%

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.

GTX 960M 226308
RTX A2000 561627
+148%

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.

GTX 960M 8465
RTX A2000 68831
+713%

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.

GTX 960M 11818
RTX A2000 84002
+611%

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:

900p95
−268%
350−400
+268%
Full HD35
−169%
94
+169%
1440p15
−200%
45
+200%
4K14
−107%
29
+107%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.78
1440pno data9.98
4Kno data15.48

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−394%
84
+394%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−282%
65−70
+282%
Elden Ring 24−27
−244%
86
+244%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 23
−326%
95−100
+326%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−265%
62
+265%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−282%
65−70
+282%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−374%
166
+374%
Metro Exodus 27
−293%
106
+293%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−196%
70−75
+196%
Valorant 30−35
−358%
140−150
+358%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 25
−292%
95−100
+292%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−206%
52
+206%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−282%
65−70
+282%
Dota 2 21
−514%
129
+514%
Elden Ring 24−27
−392%
120−130
+392%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−268%
136
+268%
Fortnite 36
−344%
160−170
+344%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−271%
130
+271%
Grand Theft Auto V 31
−316%
129
+316%
Metro Exodus 17
−318%
71
+318%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 99
−93.9%
190−200
+93.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
−196%
70−75
+196%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
−339%
120−130
+339%
Valorant 30−35
−358%
140−150
+358%
World of Tanks 130−140
−115%
270−280
+115%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20
−390%
95−100
+390%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
−165%
45
+165%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
−282%
65−70
+282%
Dota 2 30−35
−287%
120−130
+287%
Far Cry 5 35−40
−151%
90−95
+151%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
−211%
109
+211%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20
−860%
190−200
+860%
Valorant 30−35
−358%
140−150
+358%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 10−11
−480%
58
+480%
Elden Ring 12−14
−483%
70−75
+483%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12
−427%
58
+427%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
−295%
170−180
+295%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−386%
30−35
+386%
World of Tanks 60−65
−260%
220−230
+260%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14
−379%
65−70
+379%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
−160%
26
+160%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−300%
24−27
+300%
Far Cry 5 18−20
−500%
110−120
+500%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−339%
79
+339%
Metro Exodus 15
−313%
62
+313%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−370%
47
+370%
Valorant 21−24
−386%
100−110
+386%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−1100%
35−40
+1100%
Dota 2 20
−180%
56
+180%
Elden Ring 5−6
−560%
30−35
+560%
Grand Theft Auto V 20
−180%
56
+180%
Metro Exodus 4−5
−400%
20
+400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 24
−371%
110−120
+371%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−283%
21−24
+283%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20
−180%
56
+180%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6
−567%
40−45
+567%
Counter-Strike 2 3−4
−1100%
35−40
+1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
−300%
8−9
+300%
Dota 2 18−20
−295%
75−80
+295%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−410%
50−55
+410%
Fortnite 9−10
−444%
45−50
+444%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
−350%
45
+350%
Valorant 9−10
−511%
55−60
+511%

This is how GTX 960M and RTX A2000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX A2000 is 268% faster in 900p
  • RTX A2000 is 169% faster in 1080p
  • RTX A2000 is 200% faster in 1440p
  • RTX A2000 is 107% faster in 4K

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

  • in Counter-Strike 2, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the RTX A2000 is 1100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Without exception, RTX A2000 surpassed GTX 960M in all 54 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.77 35.54
Recency 13 March 2015 10 August 2021
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 8 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 75 Watt 70 Watt

RTX A2000 has a 305.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 250% more advanced lithography process, and 7.1% lower power consumption.

The RTX A2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 960M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 960M is a notebook card while RTX A2000 is a 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 960M
GeForce GTX 960M
NVIDIA RTX A2000
RTX A2000

Other comparisons

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.


3.7 1091 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 586 votes

Rate RTX A2000 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.