ATI Radeon 9600 vs GeForce GT 755M SLI

Place in the ranking	496	1458
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	5.98	0.52
Architecture	Kepler (2012−2018)	Rage 8 (2002−2007)
GPU code name	N14P-?	RV350
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	1 November 2013 (11 years ago)	1 October 2003 (21 year ago)

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	768	no data
Core clock speed	980 MHz	324 MHz
Number of transistors	2x 1300 Million	60 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	2x ~50 Watt	12 Watt
Texture fill rate	no data	1.296
ROPs	no data	4
TMUs	no data	4

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).

Laptop size	large	no data
Interface	no data	AGP 8x
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None

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	GDDR5	DDR
Maximum RAM amount	2x 2 GB	64 MB
Memory bus width	2x 128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	5400 MHz	189 MHz
Memory bandwidth	no data	6.048 GB/s
Shared memory	-	no 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 Connectors

no data

1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11	9.0 (9_0)
OpenGL	no data	2.0
OpenCL	no data	N/A
Vulkan	-	N/A
CUDA	+	-

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

-0−1

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1
Elden Ring	24−27	0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	35−40	0−1
Metro Exodus	21−24	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27	0−1
Valorant	30−35	0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1
Dota 2	30−35	0−1
Elden Ring	24−27	0−1
Far Cry 5	35−40	0−1
Fortnite	50−55	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	35−40	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35	0−1
Metro Exodus	21−24	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	24−27	0−1
Valorant	30−35	0−1
World of Tanks	120−130 +12800%	1−2 −12800%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	16−18	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	16−18	0−1
Dota 2	30−35	0−1
Far Cry 5	35−40	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	35−40	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	65−70	0−1
Valorant	30−35	0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	10−11	0−1
Elden Ring	12−14	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	10−12	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	40−45	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8	0−1
World of Tanks	60−65	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	16−18	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	10−11	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7	0−1
Far Cry 5	18−20	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	18−20	0−1
Metro Exodus	14−16	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11	0−1
Valorant	21−24	0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Dota 2	18−20	0−1
Elden Ring	5−6	0−1
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20	0−1
Metro Exodus	4−5	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	24−27	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	7−8	0−1
Counter-Strike 2	3−4	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Dota 2	18−20	0−1
Far Cry 5	10−11	0−1
Fortnite	9−10	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−11	0−1
Valorant	8−9	0−1

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.69	0.09
Recency	1 November 2013	1 October 2003
Chip lithography	28 nm	130 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	2 Watt	12 Watt

GT 755M SLI has a 9555.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 500% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 755M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon 9600 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GT 755M SLI is a notebook card while Radeon 9600 is a desktop one.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.