GeForce GTX 960M vs Radeon RX Vega M GL

Place in performance ranking	436	455
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Value for money	2.58	1.43
Architecture	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)	Maxwell (2014−2018)
GPU code name	Polaris 22	N16P-GX
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	1 February 2018 (6 years old)	12 March 2015 (9 years old)
Current price	$1307	$799

Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX Vega M GL has 80% better value for money than GTX 960M.

Technical specs

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	1280	640
CUDA cores	no data	640
Core clock speed	931 MHz	1096 MHz
Boost clock speed	1011 MHz	1202 MHz
Number of transistors	5,000 million	1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology	14 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	75 Watt
Texture fill rate	80.88	47.04
Floating-point performance	2,588 gflops	1,505 gflops

Size and compatibility

Information on Radeon RX Vega M GL and GeForce GTX 960M compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. 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	no data	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCI Express 3.0
Interface	IGP	MXM-B (3.0)
SLI options	no data	+

Memory

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	HBM2	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	1024 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1400 MHz	2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	179.2 GB/s	80 GB/s
Shared memory	-	-

Video outputs and ports

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
VGA аnalog display support	no data	+
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	no data	+
HDMI	no data	+

Technologies

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

GameStream	no data	+
GeForce ShadowPlay	no data	+
GPU Boost	no data	2.0
GameWorks	no data	+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	no data	+
Optimus	no data	+
BatteryBoost	no data	+
Ansel	no data	+

API support

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

DirectX	12 (12_0)	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.5
OpenCL	2.0	1.2
Vulkan	1.2.131	1.1.126
CUDA	no data	+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 M GL 9.35
+6.5%

GTX 960M 8.78

Radeon RX Vega M GL outperforms GeForce GTX 960M by 6% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

RX Vega M GL 3620
+6.4%

GTX 960M 3401

Radeon RX Vega M GL outperforms GeForce GTX 960M by 6% in Passmark.

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:

900p	100−110 +5.3%	95 −5.3%
Full HD	35−40 −2.9%	36 +2.9%
1440p	14−16 −7.1%	15 +7.1%
4K	12−14 −8.3%	13 +8.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
High Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

18−20

−26.3%

24
+26.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

18−20
+35.7%

−35.7%

4K
High Preset

The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt

7−8

−42.9%

10
+42.9%

This is how RX Vega M GL and GTX 960M compete in popular games:

RX Vega M GL is 5.3% faster than GTX 960M in 900p
GTX 960M is 2.9% faster than RX Vega M GL in 1080p
GTX 960M is 7.1% faster than RX Vega M GL in 1440p
GTX 960M is 8.3% faster than RX Vega M GL in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 1080p resolution and the Ultra Preset, the RX Vega M GL is 35.7% faster than the GTX 960M.
in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, with 4K resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 960M is 42.9% faster than the RX Vega M GL.

All in all, in popular games: