GPU Comparison

The AMD Radeon 880M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950M represent two very different eras of mobile graphics, and the benchmark data reflects that chasm clearly. The 880M, a modern integrated GPU from 2024, decisively outperforms the 2015 dedicated GTX 950M in every shared test, but the nature of that victory, and the architectural reasons behind it, matters more than the raw score. This analysis breaks down where each GPU wins, why the hardware differs so fundamentally, and which one makes sense for your specific needs based solely on the available data.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Radeon 880M wins every single head-to-head benchmark recorded, taking both available tests with overwhelming margins. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 880M scores 31,285 against the GTX 950M’s 9,745, a 221% advantage. The Vulkan gap is even more pronounced: 40,006 versus 6,525, a 513.1% delta. There is no benchmark category in the data where the GTX 950M comes out ahead, so the use-case split is less about which GPU wins and more about what each was designed to do.

The 880M is clearly positioned for modern, API-heavy workloads. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4 compatibility mean it can handle contemporary game engines and compute tasks that rely on newer graphics pipelines. The GTX 950M, with DirectX 12 (11_0) support, is functionally limited to older DirectX 11 titles and legacy applications. For anyone running current software, the 880M is the only viable choice. The GTX 950M’s only theoretical advantage lies in its dedicated 4 GB DDR3 memory with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, which could help in scenarios where system RAM is scarce, but the benchmark scores show that even this hardware advantage does not translate into a single performance win.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two GPUs explains the benchmark results better than any single spec. The 880M is built on TSMC’s 4 nm process node, packing 34,000 million transistors into a 233 mm² die with a transistor density of 145.9M per mm². The GTX 950M uses the same foundry but on a much older 28 nm node, with just 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die and a density of 12.6M per mm². That is a 28 nm versus 4 nm gap, representing roughly a decade of manufacturing progress.

The 880M’s RDNA 3.5 architecture is a modern integrated design with 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs, plus 12 dedicated ray tracing cores. It runs at a base clock of 400 MHz and boosts to 2900 MHz, producing a pixel rate of 46.40 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s. Its FP32 compute reaches 4.454 TFLOPS, with FP16 at the same 1:1 ratio. The GTX 950M, based on Maxwell, has 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, no ray tracing cores at all. Its clocks are lower and steadier: 993 MHz base, 1124 MHz boost, yielding 17.98 GPixel/s and 44.96 GTexel/s. FP32 is just 1,438.7 GFLOPS, and there is no FP16 support listed.

The memory systems diverge completely. The 880M uses system-shared memory, with a bus width and type that are also system-shared, making bandwidth entirely dependent on the host laptop’s RAM configuration. The GTX 950M has dedicated 4 GB DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with a fixed 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. This means the 880M’s performance can scale with faster system memory, while the GTX 950M is capped by its own VRAM. The 880M also supports PCIe 4.0 x8, double the interface bandwidth of the GTX 950M’s PCIe 3.0 x8.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Radeon 880M is the superior GPU in every measured category, and the margin is not close. With a 221% lead in OpenCL and a 513.1% lead in Vulkan, the 880M is in a different performance class entirely. Its 43rd percentile ranking among all GPUs, compared to the GTX 950M’s 42nd, understates the gap in these specific tests. The 880M’s average benchmark score of 8,436 versus the GTX 950M’s 8,135 shows a smaller aggregate difference, but that average includes many tests the GTX 950M simply did not run, the head-to-head results are what matter here.

If you are building or buying a system today, the 880M is the only rational pick. It is an active production part with modern API support, ray tracing capability, and nearly triple the FP32 compute throughput. The GTX 950M is end-of-life, with a successor already released (GeForce 10 Mobile), and its DirectX 12 (11_0) feature level will struggle with modern titles. The only scenario where the GTX 950M might be considered is if you require dedicated VRAM and are locked into a legacy platform that cannot use an integrated GPU, but even then, the benchmark data shows that the 880M’s shared-memory architecture still wins decisively.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Geekbench OpenCL?

A: The AMD Radeon 880M scores 31,285 versus the GTX 950M’s 9,745, a 221% advantage.

Q: Does the GTX 950M win any benchmark against the 880M?

A: No. In the two head-to-head tests recorded (Geekbench OpenCL and Vulkan), the 880M wins both, with zero wins for the GTX 950M.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap is in Geekbench Vulkan, where the 880M scores 40,006 against the GTX 950M’s 6,525, a 513.1% delta.

Q: Which GPU has better API support for modern games?

A: The 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and Vulkan 1.4, while the GTX 950M only supports DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.4. The 880M’s 12_2 feature level is required for newer graphics effects.

Q: How do their process nodes compare?

A: The 880M uses a 4 nm TSMC process with 34,000 million transistors, while the GTX 950M uses a 28 nm TSMC process with 1,870 million transistors.

Q: Does the GTX 950M have any hardware advantage?

A: It has dedicated 4 GB DDR3 memory on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the 880M uses system-shared memory. However, this does not translate into any benchmark win.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The two recorded head-to-head benchmarks tell a story of total dominance. In Geekbench OpenCL, the 880M posts 31,285 points, dwarfing the GTX 950M’s 9,745. That 221% delta is not a marginal improvement; it is a generational leap. OpenCL workloads, which often stress raw compute throughput and memory bandwidth, play directly to the 880M’s strengths: 4.454 TFLOPS of FP32 against 1,438.7 GFLOPS, and a texture rate of 139.2 GTexel/s versus 44.96 GTexel/s. Even with the GTX 950M’s dedicated VRAM, the sheer compute deficit is insurmountable.

The Vulkan test is even more lopsided. The 880M scores 40,006, and the GTX 950M manages only 6,525, a 513.1% difference. Vulkan is a low-overhead API that rewards modern architectures with efficient command processing and fast shader execution. The 880M’s RDNA 3.5 design, with 12 ray tracing cores and a boost clock of 2900 MHz, is built for exactly this kind of workload. The GTX 950M’s Maxwell architecture, from 2015, predates many of the optimizations that make Vulkan sing on modern hardware. Its 1124 MHz boost clock and 640 shading units simply cannot keep pace.

These results also contextualize the average benchmark scores. The 880M’s average of 8,436 across all tests places it near the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 675MX (8,427, 0.1% delta) and AMD Radeon HD 8870M (8,462, -0.3% delta). The GTX 950M’s average of 8,135 sits near the AMD Radeon R9 M360 (8,129, 0.1% delta) and NVIDIA GeForce 945M (8,099, 0.4% delta). While their overall averages are close, the head-to-head results show that the 880M’s architecture is far better suited to modern, compute-heavy benchmarks.

Specification Differences

The core specifications where these two GPUs differ are extensive and explain the performance gap. The 880M uses a 4 nm process with 34,000 million transistors on a 233 mm² die, while the GTX 950M uses a 28 nm process with 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die. The 880M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 12 RT cores; the GTX 950M has 640 shading units and 40 TMUs, with no RT cores. Clock speeds differ substantially: the 880M runs at 400 MHz base and 2900 MHz boost, while the GTX 950M runs at 993 MHz base and 1124 MHz boost.

Memory configurations are fundamentally different. The 880M uses system-shared memory with system-dependent bandwidth, while the GTX 950M has 4 GB of dedicated DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 28.80 GB/s bandwidth. The 880M’s pixel rate is 46.40 GPixel/s versus the GTX 950M’s 17.98 GPixel/s, and its texture rate is 139.2 GTexel/s versus 44.96 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 4.454 TFLOPS versus 1,438.7 GFLOPS, with the 880M also offering FP16 at 1:1 while the GTX 950M has no listed FP16 support.

The power and interface specs also diverge. The 880M has a 15 W TDP and uses PCIe 4.0 x8, while the GTX 950M has a 75 W TDP and uses PCIe 3.0 x8. Both are IGP slot width with no power connectors and portable-device-dependent display outputs. API support differs: the 880M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4; the GTX 950M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Finally, the 880M was released on 2024-07-14 and is active in production, while the GTX 950M was released on 2015-03-12 and is end-of-life, with the GeForce 10 Mobile as its successor.