NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data splits these two GPUs into entirely separate performance domains. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950, from the Maxwell 2.0 generation, posts results in three compute-oriented API benchmarks: Geekbench Metal at 7172, Geekbench OpenCL at 15662, and Geekbench Vulkan at 16734. Its average benchmark score settles at 13189, placing it in the 53rd percentile of all GPUs tracked. The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q, in contrast, has a single recorded result in 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 at 11088, with an identical average score and a 50th percentile standing.

The use-case split is stark. The GTX 950 shows its strength in legacy compute workloads measured through Metal, OpenCL, and Vulkan, where it produced three usable scores. The RTX PRO 6000 has no recorded results in those tests, so no direct comparison is possible there. Conversely, the RTX PRO 6000's only benchmark is a modern DirectX 12 test, a category where the GTX 950 has no recorded data. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 11088 reflects a contemporary gaming or graphics workload, while the GTX 950's scores reflect older compute APIs.

The database also reveals that the RTX PRO 6000's nearest rivals in average score include the RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q at an identical 11088 (0% delta), the AMD Radeon RX 550 at 11075 (0.1% delta), and the GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER at 11047 (0.4% delta). The GTX 950's nearest rivals include the GeForce GTX 480 at 13300 (-0.8% delta), the Tesla M2090 at 13075 (0.9% delta), and the Radeon Pro 555X at 13321 (-1% delta). This shows that the GTX 950 competes in a mid-2010s performance bracket, while the RTX PRO 6000 sits near modern entry-level cards in this specific test.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two is generational and fundamental. The GTX 950 uses the GM206 chip on a 28 nm TSMC process, with 2,940 million transistors on a 228 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.9M per mm². The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q uses the GB202 chip on a 5 nm TSMC process, packing 92,200 million transistors into a 750 mm² die, for a density of 122.9M per mm². That is roughly a 9.5x increase in transistor density per square millimeter.

The core configurations differ by an order of magnitude. The GTX 950 has 768 shading units, 48 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The RTX PRO 6000 has 24,064 shading units, 752 TMUs, and 192 ROPs. The Blackwell part adds dedicated hardware that the Maxwell part lacks entirely: 188 ray tracing cores and 752 tensor cores. The GTX 950 has no RT or tensor core counts recorded.

Memory architecture also diverges sharply. The GTX 950 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, with 105.8 GB/s bandwidth. The RTX PRO 6000 uses 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus, with 1.79 TB/s bandwidth. The memory clock for the GTX 950 is 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective), while the RTX PRO 6000 runs at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective). The Blackwell card's memory bandwidth is nearly 17x higher.

Clock behavior shows the newer part's efficiency. The GTX 950 has a 1024 MHz base and 1188 MHz boost. The RTX PRO 6000 has a 1035 MHz base but boosts to 2280 MHz. Despite the higher boost, the RTX PRO 6000's TDP is 300 W versus 90 W for the GTX 950. The suggested PSU also scales from 250 W to 700 W. The bus interface moves from PCIe 3.0 x16 to PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs change from 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 3x DisplayPort 1.2 to 4x DisplayPort 2.1b.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark array in the database is empty, meaning no direct comparative test results exist between these two specific cards. However, the recorded scores allow an indirect assessment through their respective average benchmark scores and nearest rival deltas.

The GTX 950's average benchmark score is 13189. The RTX PRO 6000's average is 11088. That is a difference of 2101 points, with the GTX 950 holding an 18.9% higher average score across its recorded benchmarks. But this comparison is misleading because the benchmark suites are not overlapping. The GTX 950's scores come from Geekbench Metal (7172), OpenCL (15662), and Vulkan (16734). The RTX PRO 6000's score comes solely from 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 (11088). These measure different workloads, so the averages are not directly comparable.

Within their own peer groups, the deltas tell a clearer story. The GTX 950's nearest rival is the GeForce GTX 480 at 13300, which is 0.8% higher. The Radeon Pro 555X sits 1% higher at 13321. The Tesla M2090 is 0.9% lower at 13075. The FirePro M6100 is 1.2% lower at 13354. This places the GTX 950 in a tight cluster where no rival is more than 1.2% away in either direction. The RTX PRO 6000's cluster is even tighter: the RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q matches exactly at 11088 (0% delta), the Radeon RX 550 is 0.1% higher, the GTX 1650 SUPER is 0.4% higher, and the FirePro W4300 is 1.2% lower.

Pixel and texture rates show the RTX PRO 6000's raw throughput advantage. The GTX 950 delivers 38.02 GPixel/s and 57.02 GTexel/s. The RTX PRO 6000 delivers 437.8 GPixel/s and 1,714.6 GTexel/s. That is an 11.5x pixel rate advantage and a 30x texture rate advantage. FP32 compute jumps from 1.825 TFLOPS on the GTX 950 to 109.7 TFLOPS on the RTX PRO 6000, a 60x increase. The RTX PRO 6000 also has FP16 at 109.7 TFLOPS (1:1 ratio), while the GTX 950 has no recorded FP16 figure.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 950 has an average benchmark score of 13189, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q has an average of 11088. However, these averages come from different benchmark suites, so they are not directly comparable.

Q: Does the RTX PRO 6000 support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q has 188 ray tracing cores. The GTX 950 has no ray tracing cores recorded.

Q: What DirectX versions do these cards support?

A: The GTX 950 supports DirectX 12 (12_1), while the RTX PRO 6000 supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: How much memory does each card have?

A: The GTX 950 has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus. The RTX PRO 6000 has 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus.

Q: Which card has a higher boost clock?

A: The RTX PRO 6000 has a boost clock of 2280 MHz, compared to 1188 MHz for the GTX 950. The base clocks are similar at 1035 MHz and 1024 MHz respectively.

Q: What is the production status of each card?

A: The GTX 950 is listed as end-of-life, while the RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q is listed as active.

The Verdict

The data points to two different purchasing rationales. The GTX 950, with its 53rd percentile ranking and three recorded compute benchmarks, remains relevant for older API workloads. Its nearest rivals, all within 1.2% of its average score, indicate that it sits in a well-populated performance tier. Users running OpenCL, Vulkan, or Metal-based applications on legacy systems would find the GTX 950's recorded scores acceptable for that era.

The RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q, despite its 50th percentile ranking, is clearly the superior hardware by every architectural metric. It has 24,064 shading units versus 768, 752 TMUs versus 48, and 192 ROPs versus 32. Its FP32 compute of 109.7 TFLOPS dwarfs the GTX 950's 1.825 TFLOPS. Its 96 GB memory capacity and 1.79 TB/s bandwidth are in a different class entirely. The single 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 11088, while modest in the overall database, comes from a far more demanding modern workload than the GTX 950's tests.

The choice depends on context. For a user restricted to the GTX 950's supported APIs, the database shows it performs competitively against its contemporaries. For any modern workload, particularly one leveraging DirectX 12 Ultimate, ray tracing, tensor cores, or large memory pools, the RTX PRO 6000 is the only viable option. The GTX 950's end-of-life status and the RTX PRO 6000's active status reinforce this. The RTX PRO 6000's launch MSRP is 8,565 USD.

Specification Differences

| Specification | GTX 950 | RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q |

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

| Chip | GM206 | GB202 |

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Blackwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 5 nm |

| Transistors | 2,940 million | 92,200 million |

| Die Size | 228 mm² | 750 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.9M / mm² | 122.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1024 MHz | 1035 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1188 MHz | 2280 MHz |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 96 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR7 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 512 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 105.8 GB/s | 1.79 TB/s |

| Shading Units | 768 | 24064 |

| TMUs | 48 | 752 |

| ROPs | 32 | 192 |

| RT Cores | None | 188 |

| Tensor Cores | None | 752 |

| Pixel Rate | 38.02 GPixel/s | 437.8 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 57.02 GTexel/s | 1,714.6 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Compute | 1.825 TFLOPS | 109.7 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Compute | Not recorded | 109.7 TFLOPS (1:1) |

| TDP | 90 W | 300 W |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | 1x 16-pin |

| Suggested PSU | 250 W | 700 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 5.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | 4x DisplayPort 2.1b |

| DirectX | 12 (12_1) | 12 Ultimate (12_2) |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2015-08-19 | 2025-03-17 |

| Length | 202 mm (8 inches) | 267 mm (10.5 inches) |