GeForce 210 vs GTX 960M

Place in the ranking	492	1326
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	8.00	0.66
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code name	GM107	GT218
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	13 March 2015 (9 years ago)	12 October 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	no data	$29.49

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	640	16
Core clock speed	1096 MHz	589 MHz
Boost clock speed	1176 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	1,870 million	260 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	30.5 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105 °C
Texture fill rate	47.04	4.160
Floating-point processing power	1.505 TFLOPS	0.03936 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	4
TMUs	40	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	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCI Express 3.0	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	no data	168 mm
Height	no data	2.731" (6.9 cm)
Width	no data	1-slot
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None
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	GDDR2
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	2500 MHz	500 MHz
Memory bandwidth	80 GB/s	8.0 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	No outputs	DVIVGADisplayPort
Multi monitor support	no data	+
VGA аnalog display support	+	no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	+	no data
HDMI	+	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

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	+	-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	+	-
Optimus	+	-
BatteryBoost	+	-
Ansel	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	11.1 (10_1)
Shader Model	5.1	4.1
OpenGL	4.5	3.1
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.1.126	N/A
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. 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 960M 8.76
+2820%

GeForce 210 0.30

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 960M 3375
+2809%

GeForce 210 116

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:

900p	95 +3067%	3−4 −3067%
Full HD	34 +3300%	1−2 −3300%
1440p	15	0−1
4K	14	-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p

no data

29.49

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

14−16

0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	25	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14	0−1
Battlefield 5	30 +2900%	1−2 −2900%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	0−1
Far Cry 5	28	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	31 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Forza Horizon 4	84 +4100%	2−3 −4100%
Hitman 3	16−18	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +4900%	1−2 −4900%
Metro Exodus	31 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	48 +4700%	1−2 −4700%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +2850%	2−3 −2850%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	31 +3000%	1−2 −3000%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14	0−1
Battlefield 5	23	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	0−1
Far Cry 5	24	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	23	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	71 +3450%	2−3 −3450%
Hitman 3	16−18	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +4900%	1−2 −4900%
Metro Exodus	26	0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	73 +3550%	2−3 −3550%
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +2850%	2−3 −2850%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	11	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	18−20	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16	0−1
Far Cry 5	18	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	25	0−1
Hitman 3	16−18	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	50−55 +4900%	1−2 −4900%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	27−30	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +2850%	2−3 −2850%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

24−27

0−1

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	14	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	15	0−1

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	8	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5	0−1
Far Cry 5	10	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	45 +4400%	1−2 −4400%
Hitman 3	12−14	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	18−20	0−1
Metro Exodus	15	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	10−11	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	8−9	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	55−60 +5500%	1−2 −5500%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

14−16

0−1

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	6	0−1
Far Cry New Dawn	7	0−1
Hitman 3	5−6	0−1
Horizon Zero Dawn	35−40 +3400%	1−2 −3400%
Metro Exodus	8	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10	0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6	0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5	0−1
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2	0−1
Far Cry 5	4	0−1
Forza Horizon 4	10−12	0−1
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4	0−1

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

9−10

0−1

This is how GTX 960M and GeForce 210 compete in popular games:

GTX 960M is 3067% faster in 900p
GTX 960M is 3300% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.76	0.30
Recency	13 March 2015	12 October 2009
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	512 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	75 Watt	30 Watt

GTX 960M has a 2820% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GeForce 210, on the other hand, has 150% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 960M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 210 in performance tests.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 960M is a notebook card while GeForce 210 is a desktop one.

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