GeForce 9600 GSO vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS with GeForce 9600 GSO, including specs and performance data.
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS outperforms 9600 GSO by a whopping 1334% 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 | 449 | 1193 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.09 |
| Power efficiency | 28.03 | 0.70 |
| Architecture | no data | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | no data | G92 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 26 October 2023 (1 year ago) | 28 April 2008 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $49.99 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.
Performance to price scatter graph
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 | 1536 | 96 |
| Core clock speed | no data | 550 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1250 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 754 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 4 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 105 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 26.40 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.264 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 12 |
| TMUs | no data | 48 |
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).
| Bus support | no data | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | no data | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 229 mm |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (11.1 cm) |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 6-pin |
| SLI options | - | 2-way |
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 | LPDDR5x | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | no data | 384 MB |
| Memory bus width | no data | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 8448 MHz | 800 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 38.4 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 | Dual Link DVIHDTV |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | S/PDIF |
API and SDK compatibility
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 | 2.1 |
| 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 | 32
+1500%
| 2−3
−1500%
|
| 1440p | 14 | 0−1 |
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 25.00 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+1450%
|
4−5
−1450%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| God of War | 21−24
+2100%
|
1−2
−2100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+1533%
|
3−4
−1533%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+1450%
|
4−5
−1450%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 30
+1400%
|
2−3
−1400%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+1550%
|
4−5
−1550%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+1500%
|
3−4
−1500%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
| God of War | 21−24
+2100%
|
1−2
−2100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+1900%
|
2−3
−1900%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+1357%
|
7−8
−1357%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+1533%
|
3−4
−1533%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 60−65
+1450%
|
4−5
−1450%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 160−170
+1540%
|
10−11
−1540%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 28
+2700%
|
1−2
−2700%
|
| Fortnite | 65−70
+1550%
|
4−5
−1550%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+1500%
|
3−4
−1500%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 30−35
+1600%
|
2−3
−1600%
|
| God of War | 21−24
+2100%
|
1−2
−2100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 35
+1650%
|
2−3
−1650%
|
| Metro Exodus | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+1900%
|
2−3
−1900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 40
+1900%
|
2−3
−1900%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+1357%
|
7−8
−1357%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 45−50
+1533%
|
3−4
−1533%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 26
+2500%
|
1−2
−2500%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 45−50
+1500%
|
3−4
−1500%
|
| God of War | 21−24
+2100%
|
1−2
−2100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 40−45
+1900%
|
2−3
−1900%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 19
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
| Valorant | 100−110
+1357%
|
7−8
−1357%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 65−70
+1550%
|
4−5
−1550%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 21−24
+2000%
|
1−2
−2000%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 85−90
+1600%
|
5−6
−1600%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 15
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Metro Exodus | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 70−75
+1650%
|
4−5
−1650%
|
| Valorant | 120−130
+1413%
|
8−9
−1413%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
+1400%
|
2−3
−1400%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 24−27
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 27−30
+2600%
|
1−2
−2600%
|
| God of War | 12−14 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 16−18
+1500%
|
1−2
−1500%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 24−27
+2300%
|
1−2
−2300%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 14−16 | 0−1 |
| Valorant | 60−65
+1400%
|
4−5
−1400%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 14−16
+1400%
|
1−2
−1400%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 18−20
+1800%
|
1−2
−1800%
|
| God of War | 8−9 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12 | 0−1 |
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 10−12 | 0−1 |
This is how Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS and 9600 GSO compete in popular games:
- Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 1500% faster in 1080p
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 11.04 | 0.77 |
| Recency | 26 October 2023 | 28 April 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 30 Watt | 105 Watt |
Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS has a 1333.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, a 1525% more advanced lithography process, and 250% lower power consumption.
The Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9600 GSO in performance tests.
Be aware that Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is a notebook graphics card while GeForce 9600 GSO is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
