GeForce 9500 GT vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) with GeForce 9500 GT, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
2017
15 Watt
4.15
+865%

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) outperforms 9500 GT by a whopping 865% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking7021287
Place by popularity46not in top-100
Power efficiency21.080.66
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameVega Raven RidgeG96
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Release date26 October 2017 (7 years ago)29 July 2008 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$85.99

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 cores51232
Core clock speed300 MHz550 MHz
Boost clock speed1200 MHzno data
Number of transistors9,800 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt50 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data105 °C
Texture fill rate57.609.600
Floating-point processing power1.843 TFLOPS0.096 TFLOPS
ROPs88
TMUs3216

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).

InterfaceIGPPCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data175 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
Widthno data1-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNoneNone
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 Shared1 GB
Memory bus widthSystem Shared128 Bit
Memory clock speedSystem Shared800 (GDDR3) and 500 (DDR2) MHz
Memory bandwidthno data25.6 (GDDR3) and 16.0 (DDR2)
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 ConnectorsNo outputsDual Link DVISingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataS/PDIF

API and SDK 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.

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 4.15
+865%
9500 GT 0.43

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 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) 1737
+870%
9500 GT 179

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 HD18
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
4K10
+900%
1−2
−900%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data85.99
4Kno data85.99

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 9 0−1
Sons of the Forest 12
+1100%
1−2
−1100%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 24
+1100%
2−3
−1100%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Cyberpunk 2077 9 0−1
Far Cry 5 12
+1100%
1−2
−1100%
Fortnite 30
+900%
3−4
−900%
Forza Horizon 4 26
+1200%
2−3
−1200%
Forza Horizon 5 17
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 17
+1600%
1−2
−1600%
Sons of the Forest 4−5 0−1
Valorant 55−60
+1000%
5−6
−1000%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 22
+1000%
2−3
−1000%
Counter-Strike 2 18−20
+1700%
1−2
−1700%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 42
+950%
4−5
−950%
Cyberpunk 2077 6 0−1
Dota 2 38
+1167%
3−4
−1167%
Far Cry 5 10
+900%
1−2
−900%
Fortnite 19
+1800%
1−2
−1800%
Forza Horizon 4 30
+900%
3−4
−900%
Forza Horizon 5 10−12
+1000%
1−2
−1000%
Grand Theft Auto V 13
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Metro Exodus 7 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Sons of the Forest 4−5 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 13
+1200%
1−2
−1200%
Valorant 55−60
+1000%
5−6
−1000%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 23
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
Cyberpunk 2077 5 0−1
Dota 2 35
+1067%
3−4
−1067%
Far Cry 5 9 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 23
+1050%
2−3
−1050%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14
+1300%
1−2
−1300%
Sons of the Forest 4−5 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8 0−1
Valorant 15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10
+900%
1−2
−900%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 8−9 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+967%
3−4
−967%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5 0−1
Metro Exodus 3−4 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+1000%
3−4
−1000%
Valorant 45−50
+1025%
4−5
−1025%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+900%
1−2
−900%
Sons of the Forest 2−3 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6 0−1

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9 0−1

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+1500%
1−2
−1500%
Valorant 21−24
+950%
2−3
−950%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 15
+1400%
1−2
−1400%
Far Cry 5 3−4 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 9 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5 0−1
Sons of the Forest 2−3 0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 4−5 0−1

This is how RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) and 9500 GT compete in popular games:

  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 1700% faster in 1080p
  • RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is 900% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.15 0.43
Recency 26 October 2017 29 July 2008
Chip lithography 14 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 50 Watt

RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) has a 865.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 9500 GT in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) is a notebook graphics card while GeForce 9500 GT is a desktop one.

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 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT
GeForce 9500 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.


3.4 1703 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 1329 votes

Rate GeForce 9500 GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) or GeForce 9500 GT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.