AMD Radeon RX 6500M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A Comparison

The Verdict

The data presents a clear generational gap between these two mobile graphics solutions. The AMD Radeon RX 6500M is the definitive performance leader, delivering a Geekbench OpenCL score of 38586 compared to the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A's 11998, a massive 68.9% advantage in that test. For any workload relying on general compute or modern graphics APIs, the RX 6500M is the only rational choice based on recorded measurements.

The GTX 960A finds its place strictly as a legacy option. Its benchmark score places it at the 51st percentile among all GPUs, with nearest rivals including the GeForce GTX 1080 (0.3% ahead), Radeon RX 6500 XT (1.3% ahead), GeForce GTX 1660 (2.7% ahead), and Radeon RX 7800 XT (3.2% ahead). This clustering indicates the GTX 960A, despite its age, sits in a surprisingly competitive performance band in this specific OpenCL measurement, though it has zero benchmark wins against the RX 6500M.

The RX 6500M, by contrast, ranks at the 48th percentile, with its averages pulled down by a wider suite of tests. Its nearest rivals include the NVIDIA Tesla C2075 (0.4% ahead), GeForce GTX 950A (0.9% behind), Radeon RX 550X (1.1% ahead), and Radeon R9 M275X (2.1% ahead). The data suggests the RX 6500M's average score of 10362 across multiple tests is less indicative of raw compute power and more reflective of varied workload performance, while its single OpenCL score shows exceptional strength in that specific area.

Users seeking maximum performance in modern applications should select the RX 6500M without hesitation. Users maintaining or servicing systems that require the GTX 960A's MXM form factor and Maxwell architecture have no upgrade path within this comparison, but the data cannot justify choosing it on performance grounds alone.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies separated by nearly seven years of semiconductor evolution. The GTX 960A uses the GM107 chip built on TSMC's 28 nm process, containing 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die. This yields a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The RX 6500M employs the Navi 24 chip on TSMC's 6 nm node, packing 5,400 million transistors into a smaller 107 mm² die, achieving a density of 50.5 million per square millimeter, roughly four times higher.

The compute configurations differ substantially. The GTX 960A has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 raster operation pipelines. The RX 6500M more than doubles the shading units to 1,024, doubles TMUs to 64, and doubles ROPs to 32. The AMD part also includes 16 ray accelerators, a feature entirely absent from the Maxwell-based NVIDIA chip, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing that the GTX 960A cannot perform.

Clock speeds show the process advantage. The GTX 960A runs at a 1097 MHz base and 1176 MHz boost. The RX 6500M operates at a 2000 MHz base, 2191 MHz game clock, and 2400 MHz boost. These higher clocks, combined with the larger shader count, produce a theoretical FP32 throughput of 4.915 TFLOPS for the AMD part versus 1.505 TFLOPS for the NVIDIA part, a 3.27x difference. The RX 6500M also offers FP16 performance of 9.830 TFLOPS with a 2:1 ratio, while the GTX 960A has no recorded FP16 capability.

Memory architecture diverges completely. The GTX 960A uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6500M uses 4 GB of GDDR6 on a narrower 64-bit bus, yet achieves 144.0 GB/s thanks to faster memory clocks (18 Gbps effective versus 5 Gbps effective). The API support reflects their eras: the GTX 960A supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the RX 6500M supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), a significant feature gap.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Only one benchmark appears in the head-to-head comparison, but it decisively settles the performance question. In Geekbench OpenCL, the RX 6500M scores 38586 against the GTX 960A's 11998. The delta shows the AMD part leading by 68.9%, meaning the GTX 960A achieves less than one-third of the RX 6500M's score.

This single result aligns with the theoretical specifications. The RX 6500M's 4.915 TFLOPS FP32 throughput and 144.0 GB/s memory bandwidth dwarf the GTX 960A's 1.505 TFLOPS and 80.19 GB/s. The OpenCL benchmark appears to scale strongly with raw compute resources, and the AMD part's advantages in shading units, clock speed, and bandwidth all contribute to the outcome.

Beyond the head-to-head, the RX 6500M's additional benchmark suite provides context. Its PassMark scores include 7531 in G3D, 2669 in GPU compute, and API-specific results of 92 for DirectX 9, 70 for DirectX 11, 52 for DirectX 10, and 34 for DirectX 12. The GTX 960A has no recorded results in these tests, so no direct comparison is possible from the available data. The RX 6500M also records a Vulkan score of 43837, while the GTX 960A's Vulkan support is limited to version 1.4 with no benchmark result recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher benchmark score?

A: The AMD Radeon RX 6500M scores 38586 in Geekbench OpenCL, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A scores 11998, giving the RX 6500M a 68.9% lead.

Q: How do the memory configurations compare?

A: The GTX 960A has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus with 80.19 GB/s bandwidth. The RX 6500M has 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus with 144.0 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Does the RX 6500M support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RX 6500M includes 16 ray accelerators and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The GTX 960A has no ray accelerators and only supports DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: What are the power requirements of each GPU?

A: The GTX 960A has a TDP of 75 W and uses an MXM module slot. The RX 6500M has a TDP of 50 W and is an IGP (integrated graphics processor) form factor. Neither requires external power connectors.

Q: Which GPU has higher clock speeds?

A: The RX 6500M has a 2000 MHz base clock, 2191 MHz game clock, and 2400 MHz boost clock. The GTX 960A has a 1097 MHz base clock and 1176 MHz boost clock.

Q: How do the production statuses compare?

A: Both GPUs are listed as end-of-life products. The GTX 960A was released in 2015, while the RX 6500M was released in 2022.

Where Each One Wins

The RX 6500M wins in every measurable performance category. Its Geekbench OpenCL score is 68.9% higher than the GTX 960A. Its FP32 throughput of 4.915 TFLOPS is 3.27x the GTX 960A's 1.505 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate of 76.80 GPixel/s is 4.08x the GTX 960A's 18.82 GPixel/s. Its texture rate of 153.6 GTexel/s is 3.27x the GTX 960A's 47.04 GTexel/s. Memory bandwidth is 79.5% higher at 144.0 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s. The RX 6500M also doubles the memory capacity to 4 GB from 2 GB.

The RX 6500M additionally supports features the GTX 960A cannot match: hardware ray tracing through 16 ray accelerators, DirectX 12 Ultimate, and FP16 compute at 9.830 TFLOPS. Its smaller process node (6 nm versus 28 nm) enables higher clocks at lower power, with a 50 W TDP versus 75 W.

The GTX 960A's only advantages are structural rather than performance-based. It uses the MXM-B (3.0) bus interface, which may be compatible with specific legacy laptops designed for MXM modules. The RX 6500M's IGP form factor requires a different system design. The GTX 960A also has a wider 128-bit memory bus, though this does not translate to higher bandwidth. For any application where the system can accommodate either GPU, the RX 6500M is superior in every recorded metric.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A | AMD Radeon RX 6500M |

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

| Architecture | Maxwell | RDNA 2.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 6 nm |

| Transistors | 1,870 million | 5,400 million |

| Die Size | 148 mm² | 107 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.6M / mm² | 50.5M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1097 MHz | 2000 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1176 MHz | 2400 MHz |

| Game Clock | N/A | 2191 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1253 MHz, 5 Gbps effective | 2250 MHz, 18 Gbps effective |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 4 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR6 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 64 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 80.19 GB/s | 144.0 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 640 | 1024 |

| TMUs | 40 | 64 |

| ROPs | 16 | 32 |

| Ray Accelerators | N/A | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 18.82 GPixel/s | 76.80 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 47.04 GTexel/s | 153.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 1.505 TFLOPS | 4.915 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | N/A | 9.830 TFLOPS (2:1) |

| TDP | 75 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 4.0 x4 |

| DirectX Support | 12 (11_0) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Release Date | 2015-03-12 | 2022-01-03 |