Quadro T1000 vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot rated324
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiencyno data23.03
ArchitectureGen. 3 (2005)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameGMA 950TU117
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 March 2005 (19 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 years 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 cores4no data
Core clock speedno data1395 MHz
Boost clock speed250 MHz1455 MHz
Number of transistorsno data4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt50 Watt

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).

Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone

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 clock speedno data8000 MHz
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 Connectorsno dataNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectXno data12.0 (12_1)
OpenGLno data4.6

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2005 27 May 2019
Chip lithography 130 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 50 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 has 614.3% lower power consumption.

Quadro T1000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 14 years, and a 983.3% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 and Quadro T1000. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 is a notebook card while Quadro T1000 is a workstation one.


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.


Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
NVIDIA Quadro T1000
Quadro T1000

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.


2.2 77 votes

Rate Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 407 votes

Rate Quadro T1000 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.