NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 are close competitors in the aggregate benchmark data, but their individual strengths point to different use cases. The GTX 950 wins two of three head-to-head tests, leveraging its modern Maxwell architecture to dominate in OpenCL and Vulkan, while the older GTX 670 retains a narrow edge in Metal. The GTX 950 is the better overall pick for users prioritizing newer API performance and efficiency, while the GTX 670 holds a slight advantage for Metal-specific workloads. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the GTX 950 at 13189 and the GTX 670 at 12773, placing them in the 53rd and 52nd percentiles of all GPUs respectively.

The Verdict

From the data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 is the default recommendation for most users. Its 7.6% lead in Geekbench Vulkan (16734 vs 15553) and 2.1% lead in Geekbench OpenCL (15662 vs 15341) demonstrate a clear advantage in modern compute APIs that matter for current and future workloads. The GTX 950 also does this while drawing only 90 W TDP compared to the GTX 670's 170 W, and it requires just a single 6-pin power connector versus the GTX 670's dual 6-pin setup. This makes it the more practical choice for system builders concerned about power delivery and thermal management.

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 670 is only preferable in a narrow scenario: if your primary workload relies heavily on Apple's Metal API. The GTX 670's Metal score of 7424 beats the GTX 950's 7172 by 3.4%, which is a real but modest margin. Outside of that specific test, the GTX 670 loses both other benchmarks and offers no compensating advantages in the data. Its higher transistor count (3,540 million vs 2,940 million) and larger die size (294 mm² vs 228 mm²) do not translate into better real-world performance in these tests, showing that architectural efficiency matters more than raw silicon size.

The verdict is clear: choose the GTX 950 for its superior API support, lower power draw, and better overall benchmark performance. Choose the GTX 670 only if Metal compatibility is your absolute priority and you can tolerate higher power consumption and a larger physical footprint.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 950 has a higher average benchmark score of 13189 compared to the GTX 670's 12773, a difference that places the GTX 950 in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs versus the GTX 670's 52nd percentile.

Q: How does the GTX 950 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 950's nearest rival is the NVIDIA Tesla M2090, which scores 13075, putting the GTX 950 0.9% ahead. It also leads the AMD Radeon Pro 555X (13321) by 1% and the AMD FirePro M6100 (13354) by 1.2%, while trailing the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480 (13300) by 0.8%.

Q: How does the GTX 670 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The GTX 670's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon RX 7600M XT, which scores 12710, putting the GTX 670 0.5% ahead. It trails the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 590 (12830) by 0.4%, the AMD Radeon Pro 455 (12831) by 0.4%, and the AMD FirePro W5100 (12847) by 0.6%.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption between the two GPUs?

A: The GTX 950 has a TDP of 90 W and requires a suggested PSU of 250 W with one 6-pin connector. The GTX 670 has a TDP of 170 W, requires a suggested PSU of 450 W, and needs two 6-pin connectors.

Q: Which GPU offers better Vulkan performance?

A: The GTX 950 is significantly better in Vulkan, scoring 16734 compared to the GTX 670's 15553, a 7.6% advantage. This aligns with the GTX 950's Vulkan 1.4 API support versus the GTX 670's older Vulkan 1.2.175 support.

Q: Which GPU supports a higher DirectX version?

A: The GTX 950 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the GTX 670 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), indicating the GTX 950 has more advanced feature-level support in the same DirectX version.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent different architectural generations from NVIDIA. The GTX 950 is built on Maxwell 2.0 architecture with the GM206 chip, part of the GeForce 900 generation. The GTX 670 uses the older Kepler architecture with the GK104 chip, belonging to the GeForce 600 generation. This architectural gap is the primary driver of their performance characteristics.

The GTX 950's Maxwell 2.0 design is more modern and efficient. Despite having fewer shading units (768 vs the GTX 670's 1344) and fewer texture mapping units (48 vs 112), it achieves comparable or better benchmark scores. This is partly due to its higher clock speeds: the GTX 950 runs at a base of 1024 MHz and a boost of 1188 MHz, versus the GTX 670's 915 MHz base and 980 MHz boost. The Maxwell architecture extracts more performance per shader, as evidenced by the GTX 950's higher pixel rate of 38.02 GPixel/s versus the GTX 670's 27.44 GPixel/s, despite having the same 32 ROPs.

The GTX 670's Kepler architecture was designed for a different era, favoring raw parallel throughput with more cores and a wider memory bus. Its 256-bit memory bus doubles the GTX 950's 128-bit bus, resulting in significantly higher memory bandwidth (192.3 GB/s vs 105.8 GB/s). The GTX 670 also has a higher texture rate of 109.8 GTexel/s versus the GTX 950's 57.02 GTexel/s, and higher FP32 compute at 2.634 TFLOPS versus 1.825 TFLOPS. However, these theoretical advantages do not consistently translate to better benchmark results, indicating architectural inefficiencies in the older design.

The manufacturing process is identical at 28 nm from TSMC, but the GTX 950 is denser at 12.9 million transistors per mm² versus the GTX 670's 12.0 million per mm². This density advantage, combined with a smaller die (228 mm² vs 294 mm²), shows how Maxwell 2.0 achieved better performance per area. The GTX 950 also supports newer API versions, including DirectX 12_1, Vulkan 1.4, and OpenGL 4.6, while the GTX 670 is limited to DirectX 11_0, Vulkan 1.2.175, and OpenGL 4.6.

Specification Differences

The two cards differ across nearly every core specification except for memory size, ROP count, and manufacturing process. Both have 2 GB of GDDR5 memory, 32 ROPs, and are built on TSMC's 28 nm node.

The GTX 950 has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, a 128-bit memory bus, and 105.8 GB/s bandwidth. Its clocks are 1024 MHz base and 1188 MHz boost, with memory at 6.6 Gbps effective. It achieves 38.02 GPixel/s pixel rate, 57.02 GTexel/s texture rate, and 1.825 TFLOPS FP32. The card is 202 mm long, draws 90 W TDP, requires a 250 W PSU, and uses one 6-pin connector. It has 2,940 million transistors on a 228 mm² die.

The GTX 670 has 1344 shading units, 112 TMUs, a 256-bit memory bus, and 192.3 GB/s bandwidth. Its clocks are 915 MHz base and 980 MHz boost, with memory at 6 Gbps effective. It achieves 27.44 GPixel/s pixel rate, 109.8 GTexel/s texture rate, and 2.634 TFLOPS FP32. The card is 241 mm long, 111 mm high, and 38 mm wide, drawing 170 W TDP with a 450 W PSU requirement and two 6-pin connectors. It has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die.

Display outputs also differ: the GTX 950 features one DVI, one HDMI 2.0, and three DisplayPort 1.2 outputs, while the GTX 670 offers two DVI, one HDMI 1.4a, and one DisplayPort 1.2 output. The GTX 950 supports DirectX 12_1 and Vulkan 1.4, whereas the GTX 670 supports DirectX 11_0 and Vulkan 1.2.175. Both are dual-slot cards and are end-of-life products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results show a clear split in performance by API. The GTX 950 wins two of the three tests, demonstrating its superiority in modern compute environments. Its biggest win comes in Geekbench Vulkan, where it scores 16734 against the GTX 670's 15553. This 7.6% advantage is substantial and reflects the GTX 950's newer Vulkan 1.4 support versus the GTX 670's older 1.2.175 version. Vulkan is increasingly important in gaming and compute, making this the most significant result in the dataset.

The GTX 950 also wins in Geekbench OpenCL, scoring 15662 versus the GTX 670's 15341. The 2.1% margin is smaller but still meaningful. This result is notable because the GTX 670 has 75% more shading units and 133% more TMUs, yet still loses to the more efficient Maxwell design. The GTX 950's higher clock speeds and architectural improvements overcome the GTX 670's raw hardware advantage.

The GTX 670's only win comes in Geekbench Metal, where it scores 7424 against the GTX 950's 7172. The 3.4% margin is the GTX 670's best result, but it is also the smallest absolute difference in the three tests. Metal is primarily relevant in Apple's ecosystem, and the GTX 670's Kepler architecture appears to have better optimization for this specific API. However, this single win does not compensate for the GTX 950's dominance in the other two tests.

The aggregate data reinforces this picture. The GTX 950's average benchmark score of 13189 puts it 3.3% ahead of the GTX 670's 12773. The GTX 950 also sits in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs, one point higher than the GTX 670's 52nd percentile. These overall metrics confirm that the GTX 950 is the stronger performer across the board, despite the GTX 670's theoretical compute advantages.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 950 wins in scenarios that leverage modern, cross-platform APIs. Its Vulkan score of 16734 is its strongest result, making it the clear choice for Vulkan-based games and compute workloads. The 7.6% lead over the GTX 670 in this test is the largest margin in the entire head-to-head comparison. The GTX 950 also wins in OpenCL with 15662, which covers a wide range of general-purpose GPU computing tasks, from video encoding to scientific simulations. For users running Linux or Windows with Vulkan-capable software, the GTX 950 is the data-backed winner.

The GTX 670 wins only in Metal-based workloads, with a score of 7424 versus the GTX 950's 7172. This makes it the better option for macOS users who rely on Metal-accelerated applications. The 3.4% advantage is consistent, but it is also the smallest margin in the comparison. The GTX 670's higher pixel rate of 27.44 GPixel/s versus the GTX 950's 38.02 GPixel/s does not help it in these tests, showing that architectural efficiency matters more than raw specs in Metal as well.

The GTX 950 also wins on efficiency grounds: its 90 W TDP is less than half the GTX 670's 170 W, and its single 6-pin power connector is simpler than the GTX 670's dual 6-pin requirement. This makes the GTX 950 easier to integrate into compact or power-constrained builds. The GTX 950's shorter length of 202 mm versus the GTX 670's 241 mm also improves case compatibility. For users who value lower power draw and easier installation, the GTX 950 is the practical winner, even beyond its benchmark advantages.