AMD Radeon HD 8950M vs AMD Radeon RX 9060 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive victory for the AMD Radeon RX 9060 in every shared benchmark. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RX 9060 scores 88,183 against the HD 8950M’s 13,772, a delta of 540.3%. This is not a marginal improvement; it represents a generational leap in raw compute throughput, with the RX 9060 delivering over six times the score of the older mobile part.

The Vulkan results tell a similar story, though with a slightly narrower gap. The RX 9060 posts 39,476 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the HD 8950M manages 12,979. That is a 204.2% advantage for the newer card. While the OpenCL gap reflects pure shader and compute scaling, the Vulkan delta also incorporates architectural efficiency gains, as the RX 9060’s RDNA 4.0 pipeline handles modern API workloads far more gracefully than the GCN 2.0 design from 2013.

Looking at the aggregate numbers, the RX 9060 carries an average benchmark score of 16,014 across all recorded tests, while the HD 8950M averages 13,376. The RX 9060 sits at the 59th percentile of all GPUs in the database, and the HD 8950M is at the 54th. Interestingly, the RX 9060’s nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, averages 16,129, which is only 0.7% higher. The HD 8950M’s closest competitor, the AMD Radeon RX 5500M, averages 13,356, just 0.2% lower. This places the RX 9060 in a performance tier alongside modern midrange desktop cards, whereas the HD 8950M is firmly anchored in the lower-midrange mobile segment of its era.

The wins tally is unambiguous: the RX 9060 wins 2 head-to-head tests, the HD 8950M wins 0. No benchmark in the shared set favors the older GPU. The magnitude of the OpenCL victory, 540.3%, is particularly striking because it reflects not just clock speed or core count, but the compounding effects of a newer process node, higher transistor density, and a completely redesigned compute architecture.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two GPUs is vast. The RX 9060 uses the Navi 44 chip built on RDNA 4.0, fabricated on a 4 nm TSMC process. The HD 8950M uses the Saturn chip, which is GCN 2.0, fabricated on a 28 nm TSMC process. That process shrink, from 28 nm to 4 nm, is the single largest enabler of the performance gap; it allows the RX 9060 to pack 29,700 million transistors into a 199 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 149.2 million per square millimeter. The HD 8950M, by contrast, holds 2,080 million transistors on a 160 mm² die, for a density of 13.0 million per square millimeter. The RX 9060 is over 11 times denser in transistor packing.

This density translates directly into compute resources. The RX 9060 has 1,792 shading units, 112 texture mapping units, and 64 raster operations pipelines. The HD 8950M has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. The RX 9060 also includes 28 dedicated ray tracing cores, a feature entirely absent from the HD 8950M, which has no RT cores listed. The RX 9060’s pixel rate is 191.4 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 334.9 GTexel/s; the HD 8950M manages 17.20 GPixel/s and 51.60 GTexel/s respectively. These are not incremental differences; they are orders of magnitude.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The RX 9060 uses 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth. The HD 8950M uses 2 GB of GDDR5, also on a 128-bit bus, but only achieves 88.00 GB/s. The clock speeds tell the rest of the story: the RX 9060 runs a base of 1700 MHz, a boost of 2990 MHz, and a game clock of 2400 MHz, with memory at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The HD 8950M has no listed base or boost clock, only a memory clock of 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective). The RX 9060’s FP32 throughput is 21.43 TFLOPS, while the HD 8950M’s is 1.651 TFLOPS, a 13-fold difference. Notably, the RX 9060 achieves FP16 at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, also 21.43 TFLOPS, while the HD 8950M lists no FP16 capability.

The API support also reflects the generational gap. The RX 9060 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The HD 8950M supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. The RX 9060’s newer Vulkan version and higher DirectX feature level enable features that the older card simply cannot process.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 9060 wins in every scenario where both cards have data. For modern gaming at high resolutions or with ray tracing enabled, the RX 9060 is the only viable option, as the HD 8950M lacks RT cores and has a fraction of the pixel and texture throughput. The RX 9060’s 8 GB VRAM is also a practical minimum for current game assets, whereas the HD 8950M’s 2 GB is limiting even for older titles with high-resolution textures.

For compute workloads such as OpenCL-based rendering, physics simulation, or GPU-accelerated video encoding, the RX 9060’s 540.3% advantage in the OpenCL benchmark makes it the clear choice. Its 21.43 TFLOPS of FP32 throughput and 1:1 FP16 ratio allow it to handle both single-precision and half-precision workloads with equal efficiency, which is increasingly relevant for AI inference and neural network preprocessing.

The HD 8950M’s only conceivable win is in legacy compatibility scenarios. Its GCN 2.0 architecture, while outdated, is still supported by OpenGL 4.6 and DirectX 12 (12_0), so it can run older software that has not been updated for newer drivers. But even here, the RX 9060’s backward compatibility covers the same APIs, so there is no functional advantage to the older card. The HD 8950M also draws less power at 100 W versus the RX 9060’s 132 W, which could matter in a tightly constrained laptop chassis, but the performance per watt is overwhelmingly in favor of the RX 9060.

In terms of database percentiles, the RX 9060 is in the 59th percentile of all GPUs, meaning it outperforms more than half of all recorded cards. The HD 8950M is in the 54th percentile, which is surprisingly close given the raw benchmark gap, but this reflects the fact that the HD 8950M’s average score is dragged by its weak OpenCL result, while its Vulkan score is more competitive relative to other old mobile parts. Still, for any user choosing between these two, the RX 9060 is the only rational pick for gaming, content creation, or compute.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ in nearly every measurable specification. The RX 9060 uses the Navi 44 chip on RDNA 4.0 architecture, while the HD 8950M uses the Saturn chip on GCN 2.0. The RX 9060 is fabricated on a 4 nm process, the HD 8950M on 28 nm. Transistor counts are 29,700 million versus 2,080 million, and die sizes are 199 mm² versus 160 mm². Transistor density is 149.2M per mm² versus 13.0M per mm².

Clock speeds: the RX 9060 has a base of 1700 MHz, a boost of 2990 MHz, and a game clock of 2400 MHz, with memory at 2250 MHz (18 Gbps effective). The HD 8950M has no base or boost clock listed, and its memory runs at 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective). Memory capacity is 8 GB GDDR6 versus 2 GB GDDR5, both on a 128-bit bus, but bandwidth is 288.0 GB/s versus 88.00 GB/s.

Compute resources: 1792 shading units versus 768, 112 TMUs versus 48, 64 ROPs versus 16. The RX 9060 has 28 RT cores, the HD 8950M has none. Pixel rate is 191.4 GPixel/s versus 17.20 GPixel/s, texture rate is 334.9 GTexel/s versus 51.60 GTexel/s. FP32 is 21.43 TFLOPS versus 1.651 TFLOPS. The RX 9060 lists FP16 at 21.43 TFLOPS (1:1); the HD 8950M lists none.

Power and physical specs: the RX 9060 has a TDP of 132 W and is a dual-slot card with a 1x 8-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU. The HD 8950M has a 100 W TDP and is an MXM module with no power connector or PSU listing. The RX 9060 uses PCIe 5.0 x16, the HD 8950M uses PCIe 3.0 x16. Display outputs: the RX 9060 has 1x HDMI 2.1b and 2x DisplayPort 2.1a; the HD 8950M is listed as portable device dependent.

API support: DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) versus DirectX 12 (12_0), Vulkan 1.4 versus 1.2.170, OpenGL 4.6 in both. Production status: the RX 9060 is active, the HD 8950M is end-of-life. Release dates: the RX 9060 launched on 2025-08-04, the HD 8950M on 2013-05-13. The HD 8950M’s predecessor is London and its successor is Gem System; the RX 9060’s predecessor is Navi III and it has no successor.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RX 9060 than the HD 8950M in OpenCL?

A: The RX 9060 scores 88,183 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the HD 8950M scores 13,772. That is a 540.3% advantage for the RX 9060.

Q: Does the HD 8950M have any ray tracing capability?

A: No. The HD 8950M has no RT cores listed in the database. The RX 9060 has 28 dedicated ray tracing cores.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The RX 9060 provides 288.0 GB/s of bandwidth from 8 GB of GDDR6 on a 128-bit bus. The HD 8950M provides 88.00 GB/s from 2 GB of GDDR5, also on a 128-bit bus.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor density?

A: The RX 9060 has a transistor density of 149.2 million per square millimeter, based on 29,700 million transistors in a 199 mm² die. The HD 8950M has 13.0 million per square millimeter, based on 2,080 million transistors in a 160 mm² die.

Q: Are both cards still in production?

A: No. The RX 9060 is listed as active production. The HD 8950M is listed as end-of-life.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The RX 9060 has an average benchmark score of 16,014, placing it in the 59th percentile of all GPUs. The HD 8950M averages 13,376, placing it in the 54th percentile. The RX 9060’s closest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3060 Ti, is only 0.7% higher in average score.