Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 vs GeForce 7300 GT

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1281not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.01no data
Power efficiency1.03no data
ArchitectureCurie (2003−2013)Gen. 3 (2005)
GPU code nameG73GMA 950
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date15 May 2006 (18 years ago)1 March 2005 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149.99 no data

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 coresno data4
Core clock speed350 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data250 MHz
Number of transistors177 millionno data
Manufacturing process technology90 nm130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)24 Watt7 Watt
Texture fill rate2.800no data
ROPs8no data
TMUs8no data

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).

InterfacePCIe 1.0 x16no data
Width1-slotno data
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

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 typeDDR2no data
Maximum RAM amount128 MBno data
Memory bus width128 Bitno data
Memory clock speed325 MHzno data
Memory bandwidth10.4 GB/sno data
Shared memoryno 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Videono data

API compatibility

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

DirectX9.0c (9_3)no data
Shader Model3.0no data
OpenGL2.1no data
OpenCLN/Ano data
VulkanN/A-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 15 May 2006 1 March 2005
Chip lithography 90 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 24 Watt 7 Watt

7300 GT has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950, on the other hand, has 242.9% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce 7300 GT and Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce 7300 GT is a desktop card while Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 is a notebook 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.


NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT
GeForce 7300 GT
Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


3.2 179 votes

Rate GeForce 7300 GT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.2 77 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 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.