GeForce GTX 950M vs 970

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 970 with GeForce GTX 950M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 970
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 145 Watt
24.97
+273%

970 outperforms 950M by a whopping 273% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking200532
Place by popularity56not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation23.710.85
ArchitectureMaxwell (2014−2018)Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code nameGM204N16P-GT
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date19 September 2014 (9 years ago)12 March 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$329 no data
Current price$105 (0.3x MSRP)$797

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 970 has 2689% better value for money than GTX 950M.

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 cores1664640
CUDA cores1664640
Core clock speed1050 MHz914 MHz
Boost clock speed1178 MHz1124 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)145 Watt75 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature98 °Cno data
Texture fill rate109 billion/sec44.96
Floating-point performance3,920 gflops1,439 gflops

Form factor & compatibility

Information on GeForce GTX 970 and GeForce GTX 950M 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 supportPCI Express 3.0PCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length10.5" (26.7 cm)no data
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Recommended system power (PSU)500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinsno data
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 typeGDDR5DDR3 or GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s1000 or 2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth224 GB/s32 or 80 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2No outputs
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
VGA аnalog display supportno data+
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno data+
HDMI++
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support+no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream++
GeForce ShadowPlay++
GPU Boost2.02.0
GameWorks++
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoderno data+
Optimusno data+
BatteryBoostno data+
Anselno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.44.5
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA++

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.

GTX 970 24.97
+273%
GTX 950M 6.69

970 outperforms 950M by 273% based on our aggregate 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%

GTX 970 9643
+273%
GTX 950M 2585

970 outperforms 950M by 273% 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%

GTX 970 16033
+267%
GTX 950M 4367

970 outperforms 950M by 267% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

GTX 970 42263
+169%
GTX 950M 15710

970 outperforms 950M by 169% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

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%

GTX 970 11954
+274%
GTX 950M 3200

970 outperforms 950M by 274% 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%

GTX 970 72819
+241%
GTX 950M 21356

970 outperforms 950M by 241% 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%

GTX 970 26897
+182%
GTX 950M 9552

970 outperforms 950M by 182% 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%

GTX 970 422295
+112%
GTX 950M 198867

970 outperforms 950M by 112% 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%

GTX 970 32372
+341%
GTX 950M 7333

970 outperforms 950M by 341% 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%

GTX 970 25897
+165%
GTX 950M 9777

970 outperforms 950M by 165% in GeekBench 5 CUDA.

Octane Render OctaneBench

This is a special benchmark measuring graphics card performance in OctaneRender, which is a realistic GPU rendering engine by OTOY Inc., available either as a standalone program, or as a plugin for 3DS Max, Cinema 4D and many other apps. It renders four different static scenes, then compares render times with a reference GPU which is currently GeForce GTX 980. This benchmark has nothing to do with gaming and is aimed at professional 3D graphics artists.

Benchmark coverage: 4%

GTX 970 79
+216%
GTX 950M 25

970 outperforms 950M by 216% in Octane Render OctaneBench.

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 HD83
+159%
32
−159%
1440p59
+146%
24
−146%
4K40
+150%
16
−150%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45 no data
Battlefield 5 80−85 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data
Far Cry 5 55−60 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70 no data
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 no data
Hitman 3 50−55 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100 no data
Metro Exodus 80−85 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75 no data

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45 no data
Battlefield 5 80−85 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 52 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data
Far Cry 5 55−60 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 29 no data
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 no data
Hitman 3 50−55 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100 no data
Metro Exodus 35 no data
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 81 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75 no data

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 45−50 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 40−45 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 36 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45 no data
Far Cry 5 55−60 no data
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 95−100 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 43 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75 no data

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70 no data

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 46 no data

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18 no data
Far Cry 5 40−45 no data
Forza Horizon 4 50−55 no data
Hitman 3 30−33 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55 no data
Metro Exodus 45−50 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20 no data

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45 no data

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27 no data
Far Cry New Dawn 20 no data
Hitman 3 20−22 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30 no data
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18 no data
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29 no data

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14−16 no data
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16 no data
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16 no data
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7 no data
Far Cry 5 14−16 no data
Forza Horizon 4 30−35 no data
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30 no data
Metro Exodus 24−27 no data
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12 no data

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24 no data

This is how GTX 970 and GTX 950M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 970 is 159% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 970 is 146% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 970 is 150% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.97 6.69
Recency 19 September 2014 12 March 2015
Power consumption (TDP) 145 Watt 75 Watt

The GeForce GTX 970 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 950M in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 970 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 950M is a notebook 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 970
GeForce GTX 970
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
GeForce GTX 950M

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.2 4397 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 970 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1037 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 950M 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.