NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950A Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct comparison recorded in the database is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the GTX 950A comes out ahead. It scores 10,273 points against the GTX 850M's 9,821, a 4.6% advantage. That is a modest but consistent lead, and it puts the 950A at the 48th percentile among all GPUs, while the 850M sits at the 46th percentile.

Looking at the broader score distribution, the 950A's average benchmark score of 10,273 places it within striking distance of the AMD Radeon RX 6500M (10,362, only 0.9% higher) and the AMD Radeon RX 550X (10,481, which is 2% higher). It also edges out the AMD Radeon R9 M375 by 2%. The 850M, with an average score of 9,302, is surrounded by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (9,294, 0.1% behind), the AMD Radeon R7 M380 (9,313, 0.1% ahead), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 (9,273, 0.3% behind). The gap between the two cards in question is small, but the 950A is consistently on the winning side of every comparison where the 850M is not.

There is no multi-core or gaming-specific benchmark in the record, so the OpenCL result is the single point of truth for performance. The 950A wins that test outright, and the delta holds across the board. If you are looking at raw compute throughput, the 950A is the stronger part by a clear margin, though not by a dramatic one.

Architecture Differences

Both cards are built on the same fundamental silicon: the GM107 chip, Maxwell architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. Transistor count is identical at 1,870 million, and the die size is exactly 148 mm², giving both a transistor density of 12.6M per mm². The core layouts match as well: 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs on each. Neither card has ray tracing or tensor cores, which is expected for this generation.

The differences show up in clock speeds and power delivery. The GTX 950A runs a base clock of 993 MHz with a boost clock of 1,124 MHz. The GTX 850M has no base or boost clock listed in the database, so the 950A is the only one with confirmed operating frequencies. That clock advantage translates directly into compute rates: the 950A delivers 1,438.7 GFLOPS of FP32 performance, while the 850M manages 1,154.6 GFLOPS. Pixel fill rate is 17.98 GPixel/s on the 950A versus 14.43 GPixel/s on the 850M, and texture fill rate is 44.96 GTexel/s versus 36.08 GTexel/s. These are all direct consequences of the higher clocks, since the core configurations are identical.

Memory is a tie across the board: 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus, with 32.03 GB/s of bandwidth and 1001 MHz memory clock (2 Gbps effective). The 850M is listed as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) with a 45 W TDP, while the 950A is an MXM module with a 75 W TDP. That 30 W difference is the price of the 950A's higher clocks. The 850M uses a PCIe 3.0 x16 bus interface, while the 950A uses MXM-B (3.0), which is a notebook-specific slot. Both are end-of-life products, but the 850M released about a year earlier (March 2014) than the 950A (March 2015).

API support is identical: DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.4. Display outputs are portable-device dependent for both, meaning the laptop manufacturer controls what physical ports you get. Power connectors are not required for either card, which is typical for mobile parts.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in the database's benchmark?

A: The GTX 950A wins the Geekbench OpenCL test with 10,273 points versus 9,821 for the GTX 850M, a 4.6% lead.

Q: Do the two cards use the same GPU chip?

A: Yes, both are built on the GM107 chip with the Maxwell architecture, 1,870 million transistors, and a 148 mm² die on TSMC's 28 nm process.

Q: Why does the GTX 950A have higher fill rates?

A: The 950A runs at 993 MHz base and 1,124 MHz boost, while the 850M has no listed clocks. The 950A's pixel rate is 17.98 GPixel/s and texture rate is 44.96 GTexel/s, versus 14.43 GPixel/s and 36.08 GTexel/s on the 850M.

Q: Is the memory configuration different?

A: No. Both have 2 GB of DDR3 on a 128-bit bus with 32.03 GB/s bandwidth and 2 Gbps effective memory speed.

Q: Which card consumes less power?

A: The GTX 850M is rated at 45 W and is an IGP, while the GTX 950A is an MXM module rated at 75 W.

Q: What does the percentile ranking tell us?

A: The 950A sits at the 48th percentile among all GPUs, and the 850M at the 46th percentile. The 950A's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX 6500M (0.9% higher score) and the AMD Radeon RX 550X (2% higher), while the 850M's closest competitors are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (0.1% lower) and the AMD Radeon R7 M380 (0.1% higher).

Specification Differences

| Specification | GTX 950A | GTX 850M |

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

| Generation | GeForce 900A | GeForce 800M |

| Release Date | 2015-03-12 | 2014-03-11 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 800A | GeForce 700M |

| Successor | None | GeForce 900M |

| Base Clock | 993 MHz | Not listed |

| Boost Clock | 1124 MHz | Not listed |

| Pixel Rate | 17.98 GPixel/s | 14.43 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 44.96 GTexel/s | 36.08 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,438.7 GFLOPS | 1,154.6 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 75 W | 45 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 10,273 | 9,302 |

| Percentile | 48 | 46 |

Everything else is identical: chip, architecture, process node, foundry, transistor count, die size, transistor density, memory size, type, bus width, bandwidth, shading units, TMUs, ROPs, APIs, and display outputs.

The Verdict

The data points one way: the GTX 950A is the faster card. It wins the only head-to-head benchmark, has higher clocks, higher fill rates, and higher FP32 throughput. The 4.6% OpenCL lead is not transformative, but it is consistent with the 950A's higher TDP and newer release date. The 850M's only advantage is power consumption: 45 W versus 75 W, which matters in thin-and-light laptops where thermal headroom is tight.

For anyone choosing between these two in a notebook, the decision hinges on whether you need the extra performance or the lower power draw. The 950A is the pick for compute-heavy tasks like OpenCL workloads, where it scores 10,273 points. The 850M is the pick for a laptop that must run cooler and longer on battery, given its 45 W TDP, but you give up 4.6% performance in the process. Neither card supports modern ray tracing, and both are end-of-life, so this is a choice between two legacy mobile parts.

The 950A's nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6500M, is only 0.9% faster, which puts the 950A in decent company for its generation. The 850M's closest competitor, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465, is essentially tied at 0.1% difference. If you already own a laptop with either card, the 950A is the one you want for raw compute. If you are buying used, the 950A is the better performer, but only if the laptop chassis can handle the 75 W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

GTX 950A wins on: raw compute performance (10,273 OpenCL points), pixel fill rate (17.98 GPixel/s), texture fill rate (44.96 GTexel/s), FP32 throughput (1,438.7 GFLOPS), and overall percentile ranking (48th versus 46th). It is the better choice for OpenCL-accelerated applications, GPU compute tasks, and any workload where clock speed translates directly into throughput. The 950A also wins on release date recency, launching a year later, which typically means better driver maturity and longer software support.

GTX 850M wins on: power efficiency (45 W versus 75 W), physical form factor (IGP versus MXM module), and bus interface flexibility (PCIe 3.0 x16 versus MXM-B). The 850M is the better choice for older laptops that lack an MXM slot, or for systems where the cooling solution cannot handle a 75 W GPU. It also has a successor in the GeForce 900M series, while the 950A has none listed, suggesting the 850M had a longer product lineage.

In practical terms, the 950A is a drop-in upgrade for MXM-equipped gaming laptops that can handle the extra 30 W of heat. The 850M is the safer bet for integrated-only designs where power draw is the limiting factor. The performance gap is small enough that neither card will dramatically change your gaming experience, but for compute workloads, the 950A is objectively ahead.