GeForce GT 755M SLI vs Radeon HD 6950

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6950 with GeForce GT 755M SLI, including specs and performance data.

HD 6950
2010
2 GB GDDR5, 500 Watt
5.82

GT 755M SLI outperforms HD 6950 by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking577509
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.96no data
Power efficiency2.315.95
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameCaymanN14P-?
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date14 December 2010 (14 years ago)1 November 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$299 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

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 cores1408768
Core clock speedno data980 MHz
Boost clock speed800 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,640 million2x 1300 Million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)500 Watt2x ~50 Watt
Texture fill rate70.40no data
Floating-point processing power2.253 TFLOPSno data
ROPs32no data
TMUs88no data

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 2.0 x16no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16no data
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2x 2 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit2x 128 Bit
Memory clock speed1250 MHz5400 MHz
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPortno data
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1111
Shader Model5.0no data
OpenGL4.4no data
OpenCL1.2no data
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.

HD 6950 5.82
GT 755M SLI 7.48
+28.5%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 6950 3230
GT 755M SLI 4106
+27.1%

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 HD27−30
−33.3%
36
+33.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p11.07no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Dota 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Dota 2 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Valorant 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Valorant 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Dota 2 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how HD 6950 and GT 755M SLI compete in popular games:

  • GT 755M SLI is 33% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 5.82 7.48
Recency 14 December 2010 1 November 2013
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 500 Watt 2 Watt

GT 755M SLI has a 28.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 24900% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GT 755M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6950 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6950 is a desktop card while GeForce GT 755M SLI is a notebook one.

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.


AMD Radeon HD 6950
Radeon HD 6950
NVIDIA GeForce GT 755M SLI
GeForce GT 755M SLI

Other comparisons

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.


3.7 224 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 21 vote

Rate GeForce GT 755M SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon HD 6950 or GeForce GT 755M SLI, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.