AMD Radeon HD 8950M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 Comparison

The AMD Radeon HD 8950M and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 represent two very different approaches to mobile and desktop graphics from the same era, and the benchmark data shows a clear, though not overwhelming, performance gap. The GTX 950, a desktop card from NVIDIA’s GeForce 900 series, consistently outpaces the older mobile-focused HD 8950M in the available tests, but the AMD part holds its own in the broader context of GPU performance rankings. Both cards are end-of-life products, but their architectural differences and benchmark results reveal distinct strengths that matter depending on your use case.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 wins both benchmark comparisons. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 950 scores 15662 against the HD 8950M’s 13772, a delta of -12.1% in favor of NVIDIA. This is a substantial margin, indicating that the GTX 950 delivers noticeably better raw compute performance in OpenCL workloads. The Vulkan test tells an even more pronounced story. Here, the GTX 950 scores 16734, while the HD 8950M manages only 12979, resulting in a -22.4% delta. That is a decisive victory for NVIDIA in low-level API performance, a category that often reflects real-world gaming and modern application efficiency.

Looking at these scores in isolation, the GTX 950 is the clear winner in raw performance. However, the average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The HD 8950M posts an average benchmark score of 13376, while the GTX 950 sits at 13189. This means that despite losing both head-to-head tests, the AMD card actually has a higher average score across its benchmark suite. This is because the GTX 950’s third benchmark, Geekbench Metal, scores only 7172, which drags its average down significantly. The HD 8950M, lacking a Metal test, benefits from having only its two stronger scores counted in the average. So, while the head-to-head results are lopsided, the overall picture is more nuanced: the GTX 950 excels in OpenCL and Vulkan, but the HD 8950M is more consistent across the tests it does support.

The percentile rankings reinforce this complexity. The HD 8950M sits at the 54th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 950 is at the 53rd percentile. This means that, despite losing the direct comparisons, the AMD card is technically ranked slightly higher than NVIDIA’s offering in the overall distribution of GPU performance. The nearest rivals for the HD 8950M include the AMD Radeon RX 5500M (delta 0.2%), AMD FirePro M6100 (delta 0.2%), and AMD Radeon Pro 555X (delta -0.2%), showing it is clustered tightly with other mid-range parts. The GTX 950’s rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 (delta -0.8%) and AMD Radeon Pro 555X (delta -1%), indicating it sits in a similar performance tier. Neither card is a standout in its class, but the data suggests the HD 8950M has a slight edge in overall consistency.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is significant, despite both being built on the same 28 nm process at TSMC. The HD 8950M uses AMD’s GCN 2.0 architecture, on a chip codenamed Saturn. This is a mobile-oriented design, and the fact that it is implemented as an MXM Module highlights its laptop-centric purpose. In contrast, the GTX 950 uses NVIDIA’s Maxwell 2.0 architecture, on the GM206 chip, and is a dual-slot desktop card. This fundamental difference in form factor and target platform shapes many of the other specifications.

The transistor counts and die sizes differ considerably. The HD 8950M packs 2,080 million transistors onto a 160 mm² die, giving it a transistor density of 13.0M / mm². The GTX 950 is a physically larger chip, with 2,940 million transistors on a 228 mm² die, resulting in a slightly lower density of 12.9M / mm². This means the GTX 950 has roughly 41% more transistors, which is a major driver of its higher performance ceiling. However, the HD 8950M’s more compact design is more efficient in terms of space, which is often a priority in mobile applications.

Memory configurations are similar in capacity and type—both use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus—but the speeds differ. The HD 8950M runs its memory at 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective), yielding a bandwidth of 88.00 GB/s. The GTX 950’s memory runs at 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective), delivering a higher bandwidth of 105.8 GB/s. This 20% advantage in memory bandwidth for the GTX 950 is a key factor in its superior Vulkan performance, as that API often stresses memory throughput.

The compute resources are more similar than the transistor counts might suggest. Both cards have 768 shading units and 48 texture mapping units (TMUs). The critical difference lies in the render output units (ROPs): the HD 8950M has only 16 ROPs, while the GTX 950 has 32. This doubling of ROPs explains the massive difference in pixel rate—the GTX 950 achieves 38.02 GPixel/s compared to the HD 8950M’s 17.20 GPixel/s. The GTX 950 also leads in texture rate (57.02 GTexel/s vs 51.60 GTexel/s) and FP32 compute (1.825 TFLOPS vs 1.651 TFLOPS), though these margins are narrower.

Power consumption is another point of divergence. The HD 8950M is rated at 100 W TDP, while the GTX 950 is rated at 90 W. This is counterintuitive, as the GTX 950 is the faster card yet draws less power, highlighting the efficiency advantages of Maxwell 2.0 over GCN 2.0. The GTX 950 requires a single 6-pin power connector and a suggested 250 W PSU, while the HD 8950M’s power connector is not specified due to its MXM form factor. The GTX 950 is a 202 mm (8-inch) card, whereas the HD 8950M’s dimensions are not listed, as it is designed for portable devices with device-dependent display outputs.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark wins are entirely in NVIDIA’s favor, but a deeper look at the data reveals where each card is better suited. The GTX 950 is the obvious choice for anyone prioritizing OpenCL and Vulkan performance. Its 12.1% lead in OpenCL and 22.4% lead in Vulkan over the HD 8950M make it the stronger option for compute-heavy tasks that leverage these APIs, such as video encoding, physics simulations, or modern game engines that use Vulkan. The higher memory bandwidth (105.8 GB/s vs 88.00 GB/s) and doubled ROP count (32 vs 16) give it a clear edge in scenarios that are sensitive to pixel throughput and memory access patterns.

The HD 8950M, despite losing both head-to-head tests, has its own merits. Its higher average benchmark score (13376 vs 13189) and slightly higher percentile ranking (54th vs 53rd) suggest that it is a more balanced performer across the board. In the absence of a Metal benchmark, which the GTX 950 scores poorly on (7172), the HD 8950M appears more consistent. This makes it a more predictable choice for general-purpose workloads where you are not specifically targeting OpenCL or Vulkan. Furthermore, its lower transistor count and smaller die size make it a more compact solution, which is critical for thin-and-light laptops where space and thermal constraints are paramount. The HD 8950M also supports Vulkan 1.2.170, while the GTX 950 supports Vulkan 1.4, but the AMD card’s DirectX 12 (12_0) support is slightly behind NVIDIA’s 12_1.

In practical terms, the GTX 950 is the winner for desktop users who want a capable card for gaming and compute tasks, especially if they are using Vulkan-based titles. The HD 8950M is better suited for mobile users who need a competent GPU that fits in a laptop and offers balanced performance without the power draw of a larger desktop part.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU is faster in Vulkan benchmarks?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 is significantly faster, scoring 16734 in the Geekbench Vulkan test compared to the AMD Radeon HD 8950M’s 12979, a delta of -22.4% in favor of NVIDIA.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon HD 8950M have a higher average benchmark score than the GTX 950?

A: Yes. The HD 8950M has an average benchmark score of 13376, while the GTX 950 has an average of 13189. This is partly because the GTX 950’s Metal benchmark score of 7172 lowers its average.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth differences between the two cards?

A: The GTX 950 has a memory bandwidth of 105.8 GB/s, while the HD 8950M has 88.00 GB/s. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus.

Q: How do the pixel rates compare?

A: The GTX 950 has a pixel rate of 38.02 GPixel/s, which is more than double the HD 8950M’s 17.20 GPixel/s. This is due to the GTX 950 having 32 ROPs versus the HD 8950M’s 16 ROPs.

Q: Which card has a higher transistor count?

A: The GTX 950 has 2,940 million transistors on a 228 mm² die, while the HD 8950M has 2,080 million on a 160 mm² die.

Q: Does the GTX 950 support a newer version of Vulkan?

A: Yes, the GTX 950 supports Vulkan 1.4, while the HD 8950M supports Vulkan 1.2.170.

The Verdict

The data is clear: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 is the superior performer in direct head-to-head comparisons. Its 12.1% lead in OpenCL and 22.4% lead in Vulkan over the AMD Radeon HD 8950M are decisive advantages that matter for modern workloads. If your priority is raw compute performance, gaming, or working with Vulkan-based applications, the GTX 950 is the card to choose. Its higher pixel rate, texture rate, and FP32 compute, along with greater memory bandwidth, all point to a more capable GPU.

However, the HD 8950M is not without its reasons for selection. Its higher average benchmark score (13376 vs 13189) and slightly higher percentile rank (54th vs 53rd) indicate that it is a more consistent performer across the tests it supports. For users in a mobile environment, the HD 8950M’s MXM form factor is a necessity, and its lower transistor count and smaller die size make it a more practical fit for laptops. The GTX 950, with its dual-slot design and 202 mm length, is not an option for such systems.

Ultimately, the choice depends on your platform and priorities. Desktop builders should gravitate toward the GTX 950 for its superior performance and lower power draw (90 W vs 100 W). Laptop users are constrained to the HD 8950M, which, despite losing the benchmark comparisons, still offers balanced performance at the 54th percentile of all GPUs. Neither card is a top-tier performer, but the GTX 950 is clearly the better desktop part, while the HD 8950M serves a specific mobile niche.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon HD 8950M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 |

|---|---|---|

| Chip | Saturn | GM206 |

| Architecture | GCN 2.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Transistors | 2,080 million | 2,940 million |

| Die Size | 160 mm² | 228 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.0M / mm² | 12.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not specified | 1024 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not specified | 1188 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1375 MHz (5.5 Gbps effective) | 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 88.00 GB/s | 105.8 GB/s |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Pixel Rate | 17.20 GPixel/s | 38.02 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 51.60 GTexel/s | 57.02 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Compute | 1.651 TFLOPS | 1.825 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 100 W | 90 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | Not specified | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 250 W |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_0) | 12 (12_1) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.2.170 | 1.4 |

| Length | Not specified | 202 mm (8 inches) |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | 159 USD |