GeForce 9600 GT vs Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) with GeForce 9600 GT, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
2018
15 Watt
3.05
+146%

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms 9600 GT by a whopping 146% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7721042
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.06
Power efficiency14.000.90
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeG94
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date7 January 2018 (7 years ago)21 February 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$179

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 cores38464
Core clock speed300 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors9,800 million505 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt96 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate40.8020.80
Floating-point processing power1.306 TFLOPS0.208 TFLOPS
ROPs816
TMUs2432

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 supportno data16x PCI-E 2.0
InterfaceIGPPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data229 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 6-pin
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 Shared512 MB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared256 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data57.6 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 outputsHDTVTwo Dual Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model6.44.0
OpenGL4.62.1
OpenCL2.11.1
Vulkan1.2N/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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 3.05
+146%
9600 GT 1.24

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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 1173
+145%
9600 GT 478

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
+180%
5−6
−180%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data35.80

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Elden Ring 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 16
+167%
6−7
−167%
Metro Exodus 8
+167%
3−4
−167%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10
+150%
4−5
−150%
Valorant 13
+160%
5−6
−160%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Dota 2 19
+171%
7−8
−171%
Elden Ring 6−7
+200%
2−3
−200%
Far Cry 5 15
+150%
6−7
−150%
Fortnite 9
+200%
3−4
−200%
Forza Horizon 4 14
+180%
5−6
−180%
Grand Theft Auto V 10
+150%
4−5
−150%
Metro Exodus 5−6
+150%
2−3
−150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30
+150%
12−14
−150%
Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Valorant 1−2 0−1
World of Tanks 32
+167%
12−14
−167%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+167%
3−4
−167%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+175%
4−5
−175%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Dota 2 31
+158%
12−14
−158%
Far Cry 5 13
+160%
5−6
−160%
Forza Horizon 4 12
+200%
4−5
−200%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+180%
10−11
−180%
Valorant 1−2 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 1−2 0−1
Elden Ring 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+175%
8−9
−175%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
World of Tanks 21−24
+163%
8−9
−163%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+250%
2−3
−250%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Valorant 10−11
+150%
4−5
−150%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Elden Ring 1−2 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+150%
6−7
−150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
+200%
3−4
−200%
Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 16−18
+167%
6−7
−167%
Far Cry 5 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Fortnite 2−3 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Valorant 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

This is how RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and 9600 GT compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 180% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.05 1.24
Recency 7 January 2018 21 February 2008
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 96 Watt

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has a 146% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 540% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9600 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook card while GeForce 9600 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.


AMD Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
NVIDIA GeForce 9600 GT
GeForce 9600 GT

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.


3.6 71 vote

Rate Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 2000/3000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 2050 votes

Rate GeForce 9600 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.