Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 vs HD Graphics 500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1153not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency8.79no data
ArchitectureGeneration 9.0 (2015−2016)Gen. 3 (2005)
GPU code nameApollo Lake GT1GMA 950
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 September 2015 (9 years ago)1 March 2005 (19 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 cores964
Core clock speed200 MHzno data
Boost clock speed650 MHz250 MHz
Number of transistors189 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology14 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate7.800no data
Floating-point processing power0.1248 TFLOPSno data
ROPs2no data
TMUs12no data

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).

InterfaceRing Busno data

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 typeDDR3L/LPDDR3/LPDDR4no data
Maximum RAM amount8 GBno data
Memory bus widthSystem Sharedno data
Memory clock speedSystem Sharedno data
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 ConnectorsPortable Device Dependentno data

Supported technologies

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

Quick Sync+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)no data
Shader Model6.4no data
OpenGL4.6no data
OpenCL3.0no data
Vulkan1.3-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 September 2015 1 March 2005
Chip lithography 14 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 7 Watt

HD Graphics 500 has an age advantage of 10 years, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950, on the other hand, has 42.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between HD Graphics 500 and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950. We've got no test results to judge.


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.


Intel HD Graphics 500
HD Graphics 500
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

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.


2.8 707 votes

Rate HD Graphics 500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.2 77 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 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.