Radeon E9560 PCIe vs Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureGen. 3 (2005)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameGMA 950Ellesmere
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date1 March 2005 (19 years ago)15 October 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 cores42304
Core clock speedno data1120 MHz
Boost clock speed250 MHz1237 MHz
Number of transistorsno data5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology130 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)7 Watt130 Watt
Texture fill rateno data178.1
Floating-point processing powerno data5.7 TFLOPS
ROPsno data32
TMUsno data144

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 data1x 6-pin

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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data8 GB
Memory bus widthno data256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data224.0 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 Connectorsno data4x DisplayPort

API compatibility

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

DirectXno data12 (12_0)
Shader Modelno data6.4
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0
Vulkan-1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 March 2005 15 October 2019
Chip lithography 130 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 130 Watt

Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 has 1757.1% lower power consumption.

E9560 PCIe, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 14 years, and a 828.6% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 and Radeon E9560 PCIe. 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.


Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
AMD Radeon E9560 PCIe
Radeon E9560 PCIe

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 76 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Radeon E9560 PCIe 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.