GeForce 8600M GS vs GTX 950

Place in the ranking	376	1400
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	7.76	no data
Power efficiency	10.58	0.62
Architecture	Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	GM206	G86
Market segment	Desktop	Laptop
Release date	20 August 2015 (9 years ago)	1 May 2007 (17 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$159	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 cores	768	16
Core clock speed	1024 MHz	450 MHz
Boost clock speed	1188 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,940 million	210 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	90 Watt	20 Watt
Texture fill rate	57.02	3.600
Floating-point processing power	1.825 TFLOPS	0.0288 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	4
TMUs	48	8

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	no data	medium sized
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	MXM-II
Length	202 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	no data
Recommended system power (PSU)	350 Watt	no data
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	no 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 type	GDDR5	DDR2
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	6.6 GB/s	400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	105.6 GB/s	12.8 GB/s
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 Connectors	Dual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2	No outputs
Multi monitor support	4 displays	no data
HDMI	+	-
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
G-SYNC support	+	-
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

Supported technologies

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

GameStream	+	-
GeForce ShadowPlay	+	-
GPU Boost	2.0	no data
GameWorks	+	-

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (12_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	6.4	4.0
OpenGL	4.5	3.3
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
CUDA	+	1.1

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. 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.

GTX 950 13.83
+7583%

8600M GS 0.18

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 950 5332
+7517%

8600M GS 70

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	50	0−1
4K	21	-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.18	no data
4K	7.57	no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

21−24
+950%

2−3

−950%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +967%	3−4 −967%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24	0−1
Battlefield 5	45−50	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +1300%	2−3 −1300%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +950%	2−3 −950%
Far Cry 5	30−35	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +8900%	1−2 −8900%
Hitman 3	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75 +788%	8−9 −788%
Metro Exodus	45−50	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +1025%	4−5 −1025%
Watch Dogs: Legion	75−80 +168%	27−30 −168%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +967%	3−4 −967%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24	0−1
Battlefield 5	45−50	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +1300%	2−3 −1300%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +950%	2−3 −950%
Far Cry 5	30−35	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +8900%	1−2 −8900%
Hitman 3	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75 +788%	8−9 −788%
Metro Exodus	45−50	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	35−40	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +1025%	4−5 −1025%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	108 +1100%	9−10 −1100%
Watch Dogs: Legion	75−80 +168%	27−30 −168%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	30−35 +967%	3−4 −967%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	21−24	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	27−30 +1300%	2−3 −1300%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +950%	2−3 −950%
Far Cry 5	30−35	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	90−95 +8900%	1−2 −8900%
Hitman 3	24−27 +550%	4−5 −550%
Horizon Zero Dawn	70−75 +788%	8−9 −788%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	45−50 +1025%	4−5 −1025%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21 +133%	9−10 −133%
Watch Dogs: Legion	75−80 +168%	27−30 −168%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

35−40

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	27−30	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	21−24	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	14−16	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	10−12	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	14−16	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8	0−1
Far Cry 5	16−18	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	70−75	0−1
Hitman 3	16−18 +183%	6−7 −183%
Horizon Zero Dawn	27−30 +1300%	2−3 −1300%
Metro Exodus	24−27	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	24−27	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	85−90 +8500%	1−2 −8500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

21−24
+1050%

2−3

−1050%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	12−14	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	10−11	0−1
Hitman 3	10−11	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	65−70	0−1
Metro Exodus	12−14	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	13	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	6−7	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	7−8	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	2−3	0−1
Far Cry 5	7−8	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	18−20	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	12−14	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	5−6	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

12−14
+550%

2−3

−550%

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

in Call of Duty: Modern Warfare, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GTX 950 is 1300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Without exception, GTX 950 surpassed 8600M GS in all 29 of our tests.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	13.83	0.18
Recency	20 August 2015	1 May 2007
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	80 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	90 Watt	20 Watt

GTX 950 has a 7583.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.

8600M GS, on the other hand, has 350% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 950 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 8600M GS in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 950 is a desktop card while GeForce 8600M GS is a notebook one.

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