GeForce GTX 960A vs Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS and GeForce GTX 960A, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
2023
30 Watt
9.12
+17.7%

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS outperforms GTX 960A by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking443497
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency24.198.22
Architectureno dataMaxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameno dataGM107
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date26 October 2023 (1 year ago)13 March 2015 (9 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 cores1536640
Core clock speedno data1029 MHz
Boost clock speed1250 MHz1085 MHz
Number of transistorsno data1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology4 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)30 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rateno data43.40
Floating-point processing powerno data1.389 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data40

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).

Interfaceno dataMXM-B (3.0)

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 typeLPDDR5xGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speed8448 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data80.19 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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12_112 (11_0)
Shader Modelno data5.1
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data1.2
Vulkan-1.1.126
CUDA-5.0

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 HD32
+18.5%
27−30
−18.5%
1440p14
+40%
10−12
−40%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+17.8%
45−50
−17.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+25.7%
35−40
−25.7%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+17.8%
45−50
−17.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Far Cry 5 30
+25%
24−27
−25%
Fortnite 55−60
+18%
50−55
−18%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+22.9%
35−40
−22.9%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+25%
24−27
−25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+20%
30−33
−20%
Valorant 90−95
+25.3%
75−80
−25.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+25.7%
35−40
−25.7%
Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+17.8%
45−50
−17.8%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 140−150
+24.2%
120−130
−24.2%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Far Cry 5 28
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Fortnite 55−60
+18%
50−55
−18%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+22.9%
35−40
−22.9%
Forza Horizon 5 30−33
+25%
24−27
−25%
Grand Theft Auto V 35
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+20%
30−33
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 40
+33.3%
30−33
−33.3%
Valorant 90−95
+25.3%
75−80
−25.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 40−45
+25.7%
35−40
−25.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+25%
16−18
−25%
Far Cry 5 26
+23.8%
21−24
−23.8%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+22.9%
35−40
−22.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+20%
30−33
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+18.8%
16−18
−18.8%
Valorant 90−95
+25.3%
75−80
−25.3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 55−60
+18%
50−55
−18%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+28.6%
14−16
−28.6%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 75−80
+26.7%
60−65
−26.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 15
+25%
12−14
−25%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 50−55
+25%
40−45
−25%
Valorant 110−120
+22.2%
90−95
−22.2%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+19%
21−24
−19%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Forza Horizon 4 24−27
+33.3%
18−20
−33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Valorant 50−55
+30%
40−45
−30%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+20%
10−11
−20%
Counter-Strike 2 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 10−11
+25%
8−9
−25%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+21.4%
14−16
−21.4%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 9−10
+28.6%
7−8
−28.6%

This is how Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS and GTX 960A compete in popular games:

  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 19% faster in 1080p
  • Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is 40% faster in 1440p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.12 7.75
Recency 26 October 2023 13 March 2015
Chip lithography 4 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 30 Watt 75 Watt

Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS has a 17.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 600% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

The Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 960A in performance tests.

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.


Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A
GeForce GTX 960A

Other comparisons

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.


2.9 11 votes

Rate Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 18 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 960A on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Qualcomm SD X Adreno X1-85 3.8 TFLOPS or GeForce GTX 960A, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.