GeForce 9500 GT Rev. 3 vs GTX 460 v2

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking634not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.78no data
Power efficiency2.10no data
ArchitectureFermi 2.0 (2010−2014)Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code nameGF114G96C
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date24 September 2011 (13 years ago)29 July 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 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 cores33632
Core clock speed779 MHz550 MHz
Number of transistors1,950 million314 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)160 Watt50 Watt
Texture fill rate43.628.800
Floating-point processing power1.046 TFLOPS0.0896 TFLOPS
ROPs248
TMUs5616

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 2.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length210 mm175 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount1 GB512 MB
Memory bus width192 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1002 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth96.19 GB/s25.6 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x mini-HDMI2x DVI, 1x S-Video
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model5.14.0
OpenGL4.63.3
OpenCL1.11.1
VulkanN/AN/A
CUDA2.11.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 24 September 2011 29 July 2008
Maximum RAM amount 1 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 40 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 160 Watt 50 Watt

GTX 460 v2 has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 37.5% more advanced lithography process.

9500 GT Rev. 3, on the other hand, has 220% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 460 v2 and GeForce 9500 GT Rev. 3. We've got no test results to judge.


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 GTX 460 v2
GeForce GTX 460 v2
NVIDIA GeForce 9500 GT Rev. 3
GeForce 9500 GT Rev. 3

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.


4.1 18 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 460 v2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 1 vote

Rate GeForce 9500 GT Rev. 3 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.