GeForce RTX 5060 vs Radeon HD 6950M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared Radeon HD 6950M with GeForce RTX 5060, including specs and performance data.
RTX 5060 outperforms HD 6950M by a whopping 488% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 729 | 270 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 4.95 | 8.55 |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) | Blackwell 2.0 (2025) |
| GPU code name | Blackcomb | GB206 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 4 January 2011 (14 years ago) | March 2025 |
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 | 960 | 4608 |
| Core clock speed | 580 MHz | 2235 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2520 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1,700 million | no data |
| Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 170 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 27.84 | 362.9 |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.114 TFLOPS | 23.22 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 32 | 48 |
| TMUs | 48 | 144 |
| Tensor Cores | no data | 144 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 36 |
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 | large | no data |
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 5.0 x16 |
| Width | no data | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 1x 16-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 type | GDDR5 | GDDR7 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 1750 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 115.2 GB/s | 448.0 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 | 1x HDMI 2.1b, 3x DisplayPort 2.1b |
| HDMI | - | + |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 11.2 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |
| Shader Model | 5.0 | 6.8 |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | 3.0 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.4 |
| CUDA | - | 10.1 |
| DLSS | - | + |
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Atomic Heart | 8−9
−563%
|
50−55
+563%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−270%
|
35−40
+270%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
−500%
|
40−45
+500%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Atomic Heart | 8−9
−563%
|
50−55
+563%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−583%
|
80−85
+583%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−270%
|
35−40
+270%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
−500%
|
40−45
+500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−738%
|
65−70
+738%
|
| Fortnite | 18−20
−478%
|
100−110
+478%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−400%
|
80−85
+400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−833%
|
55−60
+833%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−400%
|
75−80
+400%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−192%
|
140−150
+192%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 8−9
−563%
|
50−55
+563%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−583%
|
80−85
+583%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−270%
|
35−40
+270%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 60−65
−279%
|
230−240
+279%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
−500%
|
40−45
+500%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
−463%
|
180−190
+463%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−738%
|
65−70
+738%
|
| Fortnite | 18−20
−478%
|
100−110
+478%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−400%
|
80−85
+400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−833%
|
55−60
+833%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 10−11
−640%
|
70−75
+640%
|
| Metro Exodus | 6−7
−617%
|
40−45
+617%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−400%
|
75−80
+400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
−470%
|
55−60
+470%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−192%
|
140−150
+192%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 12−14
−583%
|
80−85
+583%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11
−270%
|
35−40
+270%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 7−8
−500%
|
40−45
+500%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−35
−463%
|
180−190
+463%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 8−9
−738%
|
65−70
+738%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 16−18
−400%
|
80−85
+400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 6−7
−483%
|
35−40
+483%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
−400%
|
75−80
+400%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
−470%
|
55−60
+470%
|
| Valorant | 50−55
−192%
|
140−150
+192%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 18−20
−478%
|
100−110
+478%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−425%
|
21−24
+425%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−472%
|
140−150
+472%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 3−4
−1033%
|
30−35
+1033%
|
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−2500%
|
24−27
+2500%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 24−27
−592%
|
170−180
+592%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−441%
|
180−190
+441%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−850%
|
18−20
+850%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 6−7
−650%
|
45−50
+650%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 8−9
−525%
|
50−55
+525%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 4−5
−425%
|
21−24
+425%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 5−6
−540%
|
30−35
+540%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 6−7
−667%
|
45−50
+667%
|
4K
High Preset
| Atomic Heart | 3−4
−433%
|
16−18
+433%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
−125%
|
35−40
+125%
|
| Valorant | 16−18
−565%
|
110−120
+565%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
−700%
|
8−9
+700%
|
| Dota 2 | 10−11
−450%
|
55−60
+450%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5
−450%
|
21−24
+450%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−1067%
|
35−40
+1067%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 1−2
−400%
|
5−6
+400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
−400%
|
20−22
+400%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 4−5
−400%
|
20−22
+400%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 16−18
+0%
|
16−18
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 27−30
+0%
|
27−30
+0%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 30−33
+0%
|
30−33
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 9−10
+0%
|
9−10
+0%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Metro Exodus, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the RTX 5060 is 2500% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RTX 5060 is ahead in 55 tests (90%)
- there's a draw in 6 tests (10%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.55 | 20.86 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 8 GB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 50 Watt | 170 Watt |
HD 6950M has 240% lower power consumption.
RTX 5060, on the other hand, has a 487.6% higher aggregate performance score, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 700% more advanced lithography process.
The GeForce RTX 5060 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6950M in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon HD 6950M is a notebook card while GeForce RTX 5060 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
