GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition vs Radeon HD 6950M
Aggregated performance score
Radeon HD 6950M outperforms GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition by 123% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
Place in performance ranking | 680 | 913 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | 0.50 | no data |
Architecture | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) | Kepler (2012−2018) |
GPU code name | Blackcomb Pro | GK107 |
Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
Release date | 6 January 2011 (13 years ago) | 12 July 2012 (11 years ago) |
Current price | $338 | $50 |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
Detailed Specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
Pipelines / CUDA cores | 960 | 384 |
Core clock speed | 580 MHz | 900 MHz |
Number of transistors | 1,700 million | 1,270 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 28 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 45 Watt |
Texture fill rate | 27.84 | 28.80 |
Floating-point performance | 1,113.6 gflops | 691.2 gflops |
Form Factor & Compatibility
Information on Radeon HD 6950M and GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.
Laptop size | large | no data |
Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 512 MB |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 5016 MHz |
Memory bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 80.26 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | no data |
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 | No outputs | No outputs |
API Compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 (11_0) |
Shader Model | 5.0 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.2 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.1.126 |
CUDA | no data | 3.0 |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 12−14
+160%
|
5−6
−160%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
Hitman 3 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Full HD
High Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 12−14
+160%
|
5−6
−160%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
Hitman 3 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Metro Exodus | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Battlefield 5 | 9−10
+125%
|
4−5
−125%
|
Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Far Cry 5 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9
+167%
|
3−4
−167%
|
Watch Dogs: Legion | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
1440p
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Hitman 3 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 10−11
+150%
|
4−5
−150%
|
Metro Exodus | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 5−6
+150%
|
2−3
−150%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
4K
High Preset
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Hitman 3 | 3−4
+200%
|
1−2
−200%
|
Horizon Zero Dawn | 7−8
+133%
|
3−4
−133%
|
Red Dead Redemption 2 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 0−1 | 0−1 |
4K
Ultra Preset
Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 2−3 | 0−1 |
Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 1−2 | 0−1 |
Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Far Cry 5 | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
Far Cry New Dawn | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
Pros & Cons Summary
Performance score | 3.53 | 1.58 |
Recency | 6 January 2011 | 12 July 2012 |
Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 512 MB |
Chip lithography | 40 nm | 28 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 45 Watt |
The Radeon HD 6950M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6950M is a notebook card while GeForce GT 650M Mac Edition is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Comparisons with Similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.