GeForce 9600M GT vs GTX 965M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 965M SLI and GeForce 9600M GT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
965M SLI outperforms 9600M by a whopping 3944% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 370 | 1324 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | no data | 1.30 |
| Architecture | Maxwell (2014−2017) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | no data | G96C |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 5 January 2015 (10 years ago) | 4 June 2008 (17 years ago) |
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 | 2048 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | 924 MHz | 120 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 950 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2x 5200 Million | 314 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 23 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 8.000 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.08 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 8 |
| TMUs | no data | 16 |
| L2 Cache | no data | 32 KB |
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 | large | medium sized |
| Interface | no data | MXM-II |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | None |
| 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 | 2x 4 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5000 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | No outputs |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| Optimus | + | - |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12_1 | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 3.3 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| CUDA | + | + |
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 | 72
+7100%
| 1−2
−7100%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+4400%
|
2−3
−4400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+6800%
|
1−2
−6800%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+4400%
|
2−3
−4400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 65−70
+6400%
|
1−2
−6400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+5100%
|
1−2
−5100%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+4350%
|
2−3
−4350%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+1550%
|
4−5
−1550%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+4900%
|
1−2
−4900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+757%
|
7−8
−757%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+396%
|
24−27
−396%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+6800%
|
1−2
−6800%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 90−95
+4400%
|
2−3
−4400%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 200−210
+1287%
|
14−16
−1287%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Dota 2 | 95−100
+880%
|
10−11
−880%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 65−70
+6400%
|
1−2
−6400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+5100%
|
1−2
−5100%
|
| Fortnite | 85−90
+4350%
|
2−3
−4350%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+1550%
|
4−5
−1550%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 50−55
+4900%
|
1−2
−4900%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 60−65
+5900%
|
1−2
−5900%
|
| Metro Exodus | 30−35 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+757%
|
7−8
−757%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+760%
|
5−6
−760%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+396%
|
24−27
−396%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 65−70
+6800%
|
1−2
−6800%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 30−35
+3300%
|
1−2
−3300%
|
| Dota 2 | 95−100
+880%
|
10−11
−880%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 65−70
+6400%
|
1−2
−6400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 50−55
+5100%
|
1−2
−5100%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 65−70
+1550%
|
4−5
−1550%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 60−65
+757%
|
7−8
−757%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40−45
+760%
|
5−6
−760%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+396%
|
24−27
−396%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 85−90
+4350%
|
2−3
−4350%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 30−35
+967%
|
3−4
−967%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 110−120
+11700%
|
1−2
−11700%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 24−27 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 20−22 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 150−160
+3800%
|
4−5
−3800%
|
| Valorant | 160−170
+5233%
|
3−4
−5233%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+4400%
|
1−2
−4400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Escape from Tarkov | 30−35
+1550%
|
2−3
−1550%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 35−40 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 35−40
+3800%
|
1−2
−3800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 35−40 | 0−1 |
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 27−30
+107%
|
14−16
−107%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 21−24 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 85−90
+4350%
|
2−3
−4350%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 24−27 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 55−60
+5600%
|
1−2
−5600%
|
| Escape from Tarkov | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 18−20 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 16−18
+700%
|
2−3
−700%
|
This is how GTX 965M SLI and 9600M GT compete in popular games:
- GTX 965M SLI is 7100% faster in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 965M SLI is 11700% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 965M SLI surpassed 9600M GT in all 28 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 15.77 | 0.39 |
| Recency | 5 January 2015 | 4 June 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 55 nm |
GTX 965M SLI has a 3943.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 96.4% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce GTX 965M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9600M GT in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
