GeForce GTX 950M vs GTX 295

#ad 
Buy
GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2 GTX 260 OEM GTX 260 Rev. 2 GTX 275 GTX 275 PhysX Edition GTX 285 GTX 285 Mac Edition GTX 285 X2 GTX 295 GTX 295 Single PCB
VS
#ad 
Buy
940MX 945M GTX 850A GTX 850M GTX 860M GTX 860M OEM GTX 950A GTX 950M GTX 950M Mac Edition GTX 960A GTX 960M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 295 with GeForce GTX 950M, including specs and performance data.

GTX 295
2009
1792 MB GDDR3, 289 Watt
2.69

GTX 950M outperforms GTX 295 by a whopping 114% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Contents

GTX 295 GTX 295
GTX 950M GTX 950M

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking774581
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.12no data
Power efficiency0.746.10
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameGT200BGM107
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date8 January 2009 (16 years ago)13 March 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$500 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores480 ×2640
CUDA cores per GPU240no data
Core clock speed576 MHz914 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1124 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology55 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)289 Watt75 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate46.08 ×244.96
Floating-point processing power0.5962 TFLOPS ×21.439 TFLOPS
ROPs28 ×216
TMUs80 ×240

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 sizeno datamedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pinno data
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 typeGDDR3DDR3 or GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1792 MB ×24 GB
Standard memory config per GPU896 MBno data
Memory bus width896 Bit ×2128 Bit
Memory clock speed999 MHz1000 or 2500 MHz
Memory bandwidth223.8 GB/s ×232 or 80 GB/s
Memory interface width per GPU448 Bitno data
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVIHDMINo outputs
Multi monitor support+no data
VGA аnalog display supportno data+
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno data+
HDMI++
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR)128bitno data
GameStream-+
GeForce ShadowPlay-+
GPU Boostno data2.0
GameWorks-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus-+
BatteryBoost-+
Anselno data+

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (11_0)
Shader Model4.05.1
OpenGL2.14.5
OpenCL1.11.2
VulkanN/A1.1.126
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.

GTX 295 2.69
GTX 950M 5.77
+114%

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.

GTX 295 1200
GTX 950M 2579
+115%

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 HD12−14
−150%
30
+150%
1440p9−10
−133%
21
+133%
4K6−7
−150%
15
+150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p41.67no data
1440p55.56no data
4K83.33no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 31
+0%
31
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 23
+0%
23
+0%
Fortnite 65
+0%
65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 26
+0%
26
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Battlefield 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 73
+0%
73
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Fortnite 24
+0%
24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 20
+0%
20
+0%
Metro Exodus 5
+0%
5
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 19
+0%
19
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 20
+0%
20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Dota 2 67
+0%
67
+0%
Far Cry 5 19
+0%
19
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
+0%
11
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 22
+0%
22
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Valorant 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Far Cry 5 6
+0%
6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%

This is how GTX 295 and GTX 950M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 950M is 150% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 950M is 133% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 950M is 150% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score 2.69 5.77
Recency 8 January 2009 13 March 2015
Maximum RAM amount 1792 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 55 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 289 Watt 75 Watt

GTX 950M has a 114.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 128.6% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 96.4% more advanced lithography process, and 285.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 950M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 295 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 295 is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 950M is a notebook 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.

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
GeForce GTX 295
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M
GeForce GTX 950M
Like
Like

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

GTX 295 GeForce GTX 295
vs
GTX 260 GeForce GTX 260
GTX 950M GeForce GTX 950M
vs
GTX 780M Mac Edition GeForce GTX 780M Mac Edition
GTX 295 GeForce GTX 295
vs
HD 7730 Radeon HD 7730
GTS 250 GeForce GTS 250
vs
FX 570 Quadro FX 570
GTS 250 GeForce GTS 250
vs
GT 1030 GK107 GeForce GT 1030 GK107
GTS 250 GeForce GTS 250
vs
A100 SXM4 80 GB A100 SXM4 80 GB
GTX 275 GeForce GTX 275
vs
HD Graphics 515 HD Graphics 515
GTX 285 Mac Edition GTX 285 Mac Edition
vs
RTX 4060 Mobile RTX 4060 Mobile
GTX 295 GeForce GTX 295
vs
HD Graphics 620 HD Graphics 620
GTX 295 GeForce GTX 295
vs
ATI HD 5530 Radeon HD 5530
GTX 285 GeForce GTX 285
vs
Quadro 2000 Quadro 2000
GT 130 Mac Edition GeForce GT 130 Mac Edition
vs
RTX A400 RTX A400
GTX 260 216 Rev. 2 GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 Rev. 2
vs
8800 GTS 320 GeForce 8800 GTS 320

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.

4 88 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 295 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 1151 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 950M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 295 or GeForce GTX 950M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.