GeForce 9500 GT vs Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)
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) outperforms 9500 GT by a whopping 865% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 706 | 1292 |
| Place by popularity | 46 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 21.10 | 0.66 |
| Architecture | Vega (2017−2020) | Tesla (2006−2010) |
| GPU code name | Vega Raven Ridge | G96 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 26 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 cores | 512 | 32 |
| Core clock speed | 300 MHz | 550 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1200 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 9,800 million | 314 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 50 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 57.60 | 9.600 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.843 TFLOPS | 0.096 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 8 | 8 |
| TMUs | 32 | 16 |
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).
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 175 mm |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (11.1 cm) |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
| 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 type | System Shared | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 800 (GDDR3) and 500 (DDR2) MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 (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 Connectors | No outputs | Dual Link DVISingle Link DVI |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | S/PDIF |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.4 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.1 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | N/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.
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.
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 | 18
+1700%
| 1−2
−1700%
|
| 4K | 10
+900%
| 1−2
−900%
|
Cost per frame, $
| 1080p | no data | 85.99 |
| 4K | no data | 85.99 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 18−20
+1700%
|
1−2
−1700%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 9 | 0−1 |
| God of War | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
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%
|
| God of War | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 17
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| 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%
|
| God of War | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 13
+1200%
|
1−2
−1200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 7 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| 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%
|
| God of War | 10−11
+900%
|
1−2
−900%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14
+1300%
|
1−2
−1300%
|
| 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%
|
| God of War | 3−4 | 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 |
| God of War | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5 | 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.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
