AMD Radeon Pro 450 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split in workload preference between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 and the AMD Radeon Pro 450. Across three Geekbench tests, the GTX 950 takes two wins while the Radeon Pro 450 claims one, but the margins tell a more nuanced story than the raw win count.

The most striking result comes from Geekbench OpenCL. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 scores 15,662 against the Radeon Pro 450's 9,002. That is a 74% advantage for the GTX 950, easily the largest gap in either direction across the benchmark suite. In practical terms, the GTX 950 delivers substantially higher raw compute throughput in OpenCL workloads, which often reflects general-purpose GPU compute tasks rather than graphics rendering specifically.

The Vulkan test shows a similar but slightly smaller gap. The GTX 950 posts 16,734 while the Radeon Pro 450 manages 10,518, putting the NVIDIA card 59.1% ahead. Vulkan performance matters for modern game engines and cross-platform graphics APIs, and the data indicates the GTX 950 has a considerable edge in this area.

The single win for the AMD card comes in Geekbench Metal, where the Radeon Pro 450 scores 12,893 versus the GTX 950's 7,172. The NVIDIA card trails by 44.4% in this test. Metal is Apple's graphics API, and the Radeon Pro 450's design as a Mac-oriented mobile GPU explains why it excels here. The GTX 950, aimed at desktop gaming systems, does not prioritize Metal optimization.

Looking at overall averages, the GTX 950 maintains a commanding lead. Its average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 13,189, while the Radeon Pro 450 sits at 10,804. That difference places the GTX 950 at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, versus the 49th percentile for the Radeon Pro 450. The percentile gap is modest, but the raw score difference of roughly 2,385 points is significant.

The nearest rival data provides additional context. The GTX 950's closest competitors include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 at an average score of 13,300 (0.8% higher than the GTX 950), the AMD Radeon Pro 555X at 13,321 (1% higher), and the AMD FirePro M6100 at 13,354 (1.2% higher). The GTX 950 also edges out the NVIDIA Tesla M2090, which scores 13,075, by 0.9%. These tight margins suggest the GTX 950 sits squarely in a competitive mid-range tier where small performance differences separate cards.

The Radeon Pro 450's nearest rivals tell a similar story at a lower performance level. The NVIDIA Quadro K2200 scores 10,761, just 0.4% above the Radeon Pro 450. The NVIDIA GeForce MX350 comes in at 10,883, 0.7% higher. The AMD Radeon RX 6600S trails at 10,629, putting the Radeon Pro 450 1.7% ahead. Only the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti, at 10,690, sits below the Radeon Pro 450 within its nearest rival group, with the AMD card leading by 1.1%.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 uses the GM206 chip built on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The AMD Radeon Pro 450 uses the Baffin chip with GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The process node difference is substantial: 28 nm versus 14 nm, with the smaller node generally enabling better power efficiency and higher transistor density.

Transistor counts are surprisingly close despite the process gap. The GTX 950 packs 2,940 million transistors into a 228 mm² die, yielding a density of 12.9 million transistors per square millimeter. The Radeon Pro 450 contains 3,000 million transistors on a much smaller 123 mm² die, achieving a density of 24.4 million transistors per square millimeter. The AMD chip nearly doubles the transistor density of the NVIDIA chip, a direct consequence of the more advanced manufacturing process.

Compute resources differ in every major category. The GTX 950 has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The Radeon Pro 450 comes with 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and only 16 ROPs. The ROP count is particularly notable: the GTX 950 has exactly twice as many render output units as the Radeon Pro 450. This affects pixel fillrate capabilities, and the recorded pixel rate numbers confirm the impact. The GTX 950 achieves 38.02 GPixel/s while the Radeon Pro 450 manages just 12.80 GPixel/s, a roughly threefold difference.

Texture throughput follows a similar pattern. The GTX 950 delivers 57.02 GTexel/s versus 32.00 GTexel/s for the Radeon Pro 450. Floating point performance also favors the NVIDIA card: the GTX 950 is rated at 1.825 TFLOPS for FP32, while the Radeon Pro 450 offers 1,024.0 GFLOPS (approximately 1.024 TFLOPS). The AMD card does have FP16 support at 1,024.0 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, but the GTX 950 has no recorded FP16 rating.

Memory subsystems are closer in configuration but still differ in bandwidth. Both cards use 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The GTX 950 runs its memory at 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) for 105.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Radeon Pro 450 runs memory at 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective), yielding 81.28 GB/s. The GTX 950 therefore has roughly 30% more memory bandwidth, which compounds its other compute advantages.

Power and physical characteristics diverge sharply. The GTX 950 carries a 90 W TDP, requires a dual-slot cooler, and needs a single 6-pin power connector with a suggested 250 W power supply. The Radeon Pro 450 sips just 35 W and comes as an MXM module, meaning it is designed for laptop or compact systems. No power connector is listed for the AMD card, and no suggested PSU figure is recorded. The GTX 950 measures 202 mm (8 inches) in length, while the Radeon Pro 450 has no recorded dimensions, consistent with its mobile form factor.

API support shows minor differences. The GTX 950 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. The Radeon Pro 450 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.3. The feature level difference in DirectX 12 (12_1 versus 12_0) and the Vulkan version gap (1.4 versus 1.3) are small but measurable.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data supports a clear use-case split. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 is the stronger choice for compute-heavy workloads accessed through OpenCL and Vulkan. Its 74% OpenCL advantage and 59.1% Vulkan advantage over the Radeon Pro 450 indicate that any application leveraging these APIs will see substantially better performance on the NVIDIA card. This includes many scientific computing tasks, rendering pipelines, and Vulkan-based games.

The GTX 950 also wins on raw graphics throughput. Its pixel rate of 38.02 GPixel/s and texture rate of 57.02 GTexel/s dwarf the Radeon Pro 450's 12.80 GPixel/s and 32.00 GTexel/s. For traditional rasterization workloads where fillrate matters, the GTX 950 is the clear choice. The doubling of ROPs from 16 to 32 directly supports this advantage.

The AMD Radeon Pro 450 wins in one specific domain: Metal API performance. Its 12,893 Metal score versus 7,172 for the GTX 950 is a 44.4% gap in AMD's favor. Metal is the native graphics API for Apple platforms, and the Radeon Pro 450's positioning as a Radeon Pro Mac series GPU explains its strength here. Users working within Apple's ecosystem, particularly with Metal-accelerated applications, will find the Radeon Pro 450 markedly faster.

The Radeon Pro 450 also wins on power efficiency by a wide margin. Its 35 W TDP is less than half the GTX 950's 90 W. For thermally constrained systems, especially laptops or compact workstations, this efficiency advantage is significant. The MXM module form factor reinforces this design intent: the Radeon Pro 450 is built for portable systems where power draw and heat dissipation are critical constraints.

The GTX 950's higher TDP and dual-slot cooler design assume a desktop environment with adequate airflow and power delivery. Its 250 W suggested PSU requirement, while modest, still exceeds what a typical laptop power budget allows. The Radeon Pro 450 requires no such external power consideration.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 | AMD Radeon Pro 450 |

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

| Chip | GM206 | Baffin |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Generation | GeForce 900 | Radeon Pro Mac (400 Series) |

| Process node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 2,940 million | 3,000 million |

| Die size | 228 mm² | 123 mm² |

| Transistor density | 12.9M / mm² | 24.4M / mm² |

| Base clock | 1024 MHz | Not recorded |

| Boost clock | 1188 MHz | Not recorded |

| Memory clock | 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) | 1270 MHz (5.1 Gbps effective) |

| Memory bandwidth | 105.8 GB/s | 81.28 GB/s |

| Shading units | 768 | 640 |

| TMUs | 48 | 40 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel rate | 38.02 GPixel/s | 12.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture rate | 57.02 GTexel/s | 32.00 GTexel/s |

| FP32 performance | 1.825 TFLOPS | 1,024.0 GFLOPS |

| FP16 performance | Not recorded | 1,024.0 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 90 W | 35 W |

| Slot width | Dual-slot | MXM Module |

| Power connectors | 1x 6-pin | None recorded |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | None recorded |

| Bus interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

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

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

| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Vulkan | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release date | 2015-08-19 | 2016-10-29 |

| Launch MSRP | 159 USD | Not recorded |

The GTX 950 uses a wider PCIe 3.0 x16 interface versus the Radeon Pro 450's x8 link. It also offers fixed display outputs (DVI, HDMI 2.0, and three DisplayPort 1.2 connections), while the Radeon Pro 450's outputs are listed as portable device dependent, reflecting its laptop-oriented design.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has higher average benchmark scores?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 has an average benchmark score of 13,189, while the AMD Radeon Pro 450 averages 10,804. The GTX 950 also sits at the 53rd percentile of all GPUs in the database, compared to the 49th percentile for the Radeon Pro 450.

Q: Why does the Radeon Pro 450 win the Metal benchmark?

A: The Radeon Pro 450 scores 12,893 in Geekbench Metal versus 7,172 for the GTX 950, a 44.4% advantage. This aligns with the AMD card's design as a Radeon Pro Mac series GPU, which targets Apple platforms where Metal is the native graphics API.

Q: How large is the OpenCL performance gap?

A: The GTX 950 scores 15,662 in Geekbench OpenCL against 9,002 for the Radeon Pro 450. That gives the NVIDIA card a 74% lead, the largest margin in any recorded benchmark test between these two GPUs.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth specifications for each card?

A: Both cards have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. The GTX 950 achieves 105.8 GB/s bandwidth with a 1653 MHz memory clock (6.6 Gbps effective), while the Radeon Pro 450 reaches 81.28 GB/s with a 1270 MHz clock (5.1 Gbps effective).

Q: How do the power requirements compare?

A: The GTX 950 has a 90 W TDP, requires a dual-slot cooler, one 6-pin power connector, and a suggested 250 W power supply. The Radeon Pro 450 has a 35 W TDP, uses an MXM module form factor, and has no recorded power connector or PSU requirement.

Q: Which GPU has more render output units and why does it matter?

A: The GTX 950 has 32 ROPs, double the 16 ROPs on the Radeon Pro 450. This contributes to the GTX 950's pixel rate of 38.02 GPixel/s, far above the Radeon Pro 450's 12.80 GPixel/s, which affects performance in fillrate-bound rendering workloads.