GeForce GT 755M SLI vs Radeon HD 6950

Place in the ranking	565	497
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.11	no data
Power efficiency	2.33	6.00
Architecture	TeraScale 3 (2010−2013)	Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code name	Cayman	N14P-?
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	14 December 2010 (14 years ago)	1 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$299	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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	1408	768
Core clock speed	no data	980 MHz
Boost clock speed	800 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,640 million	2x 1300 Million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	500 Watt	2x ~50 Watt
Texture fill rate	70.40	no data
Floating-point processing power	2.253 TFLOPS	no data
ROPs	32	no data
TMUs	88	no 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).

Laptop size	no data	large
Bus support	PCIe 2.0 x16	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	no data
Length	267 mm	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	no 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	2x 2 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	2x 128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1250 MHz	5400 MHz
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 Connectors	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort	no data
Eyefinity	+	-
HDMI	+	-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 11	11
Shader Model	5.0	no data
OpenGL	4.4	no data
OpenCL	1.2	no data
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.

HD 6950 6.77

GT 755M SLI 8.70
+28.5%

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.

HD 6950 3230

GT 755M SLI 4106
+27.1%

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

27−30

−33.3%

36
+33.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

11.07

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Dota 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Fortnite	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
World of Tanks	120−130 +0%	120−130 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Dota 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70 +0%	65−70 +0%
Valorant	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
World of Tanks	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Far Cry 5	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Metro Exodus	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Valorant	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Metro Exodus	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Far Cry 5	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Fortnite	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Valorant	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%

This is how HD 6950 and GT 755M SLI compete in popular games:

GT 755M SLI is 33% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	6.77	8.70
Recency	14 December 2010	1 November 2013
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	500 Watt	2 Watt

GT 755M SLI has a 28.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 24900% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 755M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6950 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6950 is a desktop card while GeForce GT 755M SLI is a notebook one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.