GeForce 9500 GT vs Iris Graphics 6100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Iris Graphics 6100 with GeForce 9500 GT, including specs and performance data.

Iris Graphics 6100
2015
15 Watt
2.34
+444%

Iris Graphics 6100 outperforms 9500 GT by a whopping 444% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking8491248
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency10.680.59
ArchitectureGeneration 8.0 (2014−2015)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameBroadwell GT3G96
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date5 January 2015 (9 years ago)29 July 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$85.99

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 cores38432
Core clock speed300 MHz550 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors189 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt50 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate48.009.600
Floating-point processing power0.768 TFLOPS0.096 TFLOPS
ROPs68
TMUs4816

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 BusPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data175 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
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 typeSystem SharedGDDR3
Maximum RAM amountSystem Shared1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared800 (GDDR3) and 500 (DDR2) MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 (GDDR3) and 16.0 (DDR2)
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 DependentDual Link DVISingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

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 (11_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.42.1
OpenCL3.01.1
Vulkan+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.

Iris Graphics 6100 2.34
+444%
9500 GT 0.43

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.

Iris Graphics 6100 900
+445%
9500 GT 165

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 HD14
+600%
2−3
−600%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data43.00

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+500%
6−7
−500%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Battlefield 5 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+600%
2−3
−600%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+500%
6−7
−500%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 18−20
+500%
3−4
−500%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+500%
2−3
−500%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
+500%
6−7
−500%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4 0−1
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4 0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3 0−1
Hitman 3 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Horizon Zero Dawn 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6 0−1

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 1−2 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2 0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 1−2 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 0−1 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4 0−1

This is how Iris Graphics 6100 and 9500 GT compete in popular games:

  • Iris Graphics 6100 is 600% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.34 0.43
Recency 5 January 2015 29 July 2008
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 50 Watt

Iris Graphics 6100 has a 444.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Iris Graphics 6100 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9500 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that Iris Graphics 6100 is a notebook card while GeForce 9500 GT is a desktop 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.


Intel Iris Graphics 6100
Iris Graphics 6100
NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT
GeForce 9500 GT

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.


3.2 133 votes

Rate Iris Graphics 6100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 1260 votes

Rate GeForce 9500 GT 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.