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

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only directly comparable benchmark between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A and the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT is the Geekbench OpenCL test, and the result is decisive. The RX 6500 XT scores 48,289 points against the GTX 960A’s 11,998, a delta of -75.2% from the GTX 960A’s perspective. In practical terms, the AMD card delivers roughly four times the OpenCL compute throughput. This is not a marginal generational improvement; it is a categorical shift in performance class.

Looking at the broader benchmark landscape, the GTX 960A’s average benchmark score is 11,998, placing it at the 51st percentile of all GPUs. Its nearest rival, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080, averages 11,960, meaning the GTX 960A edges ahead by just 0.3%. The RX 6500 XT, by comparison, averages 11,842, which puts it 1.3% behind the GTX 960A in aggregate scoring despite its massive OpenCL advantage. This apparent contradiction stems from the fact that the GTX 960A has only one benchmark entry (Geekbench OpenCL) contributing to its average, while the RX 6500 XT’s average is computed over ten different tests, including multiple PassMark DirectX variants and 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12.

The RX 6500 XT’s individual scores reveal a mixed profile. Its PassMark G3D score of 9,608 and PassMark GPU Compute score of 4,456 indicate solid rasterization and compute performance. However, its PassMark DirectX 12 score is only 38, while DirectX 11 scores 90, DirectX 10 scores 60, and DirectX 9 scores 108. The 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 235 is notably low in absolute terms, suggesting the card’s DX12 path may be underperforming relative to its other workloads. The GTX 960A, lacking these additional benchmarks, cannot be directly compared on those tests, but the data available shows the RX 6500 XT as the clear winner in raw OpenCL throughput.

# Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different architectural eras and design philosophies. The GTX 960A uses the GM107 chip based on NVIDIA’s Maxwell architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. The die measures 148 mm² and contains 1,870 million transistors, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the RX 6500 XT employs the Navi 24 chip on AMD’s RDNA 2.0 architecture, built on a 6 nm process, also at TSMC. Its die is smaller at 107 mm² but packs 5,400 million transistors, achieving 50.5 million per square millimeter — a 4x improvement in density.

Memory configurations diverge sharply. The GTX 960A carries 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth. The RX 6500 XT offers 4 GB of GDDR6 on a 64-bit bus, yet achieves 143.9 GB/s bandwidth due to much faster memory clocks (18 Gbps effective versus 5 Gbps effective). The RX 6500 XT’s narrower bus is compensated by higher memory efficiency, a hallmark of RDNA 2’s cache hierarchy.

Compute resources tell a similar story of generational leap. The GTX 960A has 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. The RX 6500 XT more than doubles these: 1,024 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. Clock speeds also favor AMD dramatically — the RX 6500 XT boosts to 2,815 MHz versus the GTX 960A’s 1,176 MHz boost. The result is a pixel rate of 90.08 GPixel/s and texture rate of 180.2 GTexel/s for the RX 6500 XT, versus 18.82 GPixel/s and 47.04 GTexel/s for the GTX 960A. FP32 performance scales accordingly: 5.765 TFLOPS versus 1.505 TFLOPS, a 3.8x advantage. The RX 6500 XT also offers FP16 at 11.53 TFLOPS (2:1 rate), which the GTX 960A lacks entirely.

Feature support differs as well. The RX 6500 XT includes 16 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), while the GTX 960A is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) with no ray tracing hardware. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4, but the AMD card’s API compatibility is more future-proof. The RX 6500 XT also uses a PCIe 4.0 x4 interface, whereas the GTX 960A employs an MXM-B (3.0) bus, reflecting its mobile-oriented design. Power consumption is higher on the RX 6500 XT at 107 W TDP versus 75 W, and it requires a 6-pin power connector and a 300 W suggested PSU, while the GTX 960A is an MXM module with no power connectors.

# Where Each One Wins

The RX 6500 XT wins decisively in raw compute and modern workload support. Its OpenCL score of 48,289 is over four times the GTX 960A’s 11,998, making it the clear choice for GPU compute tasks, OpenCL-accelerated applications, or any workload that leverages its 16 ray tracing cores. The 4 GB GDDR6 memory with 143.9 GB/s bandwidth also gives it a substantial edge in texture-heavy scenarios and higher-resolution framebuffers. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support means it can run modern titles with advanced features like ray tracing, while the GTX 960A’s DirectX 12 (11_0) support caps it at older rendering paths.

The GTX 960A, however, has a few narrow advantages based on the data. Its average benchmark score of 11,998 is 1.3% higher than the RX 6500 XT’s 11,842, though this is heavily influenced by the fact that the GTX 960A’s average is derived from a single benchmark while the RX 6500 XT’s includes several lower-scoring DX12 and compute tests. The GTX 960A also has a lower TDP at 75 W versus 107 W, making it more power-efficient in absolute terms, and its MXM form factor with no external power connectors lends itself to compact or embedded systems where the RX 6500 XT’s dual-slot design and 6-pin connector would not fit.

In legacy API workloads, the RX 6500 XT’s PassMark scores show strength in DirectX 9 (108) and DirectX 11 (90) but weakness in DirectX 12 (38). This suggests that for older DirectX 9/10/11 games, the RX 6500 XT performs admirably, but its DX12 path is underdeveloped. The GTX 960A, lacking these specific benchmarks, cannot be compared directly, but its Maxwell architecture was known for solid DX11 performance in its era. The RX 6500 XT’s PassMark G2D score of 815 indicates strong 2D desktop performance, while no comparable data exists for the GTX 960A.

# The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion: the AMD Radeon RX 6500 XT is the overwhelmingly superior GPU in compute performance, memory bandwidth, and modern feature support. Its 4x OpenCL advantage over the GTX 960A is not a subtle edge but a generational chasm. For any user prioritizing raw throughput, ray tracing capability, or DirectX 12 Ultimate support, the RX 6500 XT is the only rational choice.

The GTX 960A’s only statistical wins are its 1.3% higher average benchmark score and its lower power draw. The former is an artifact of limited benchmark data — a single OpenCL test inflated by the absence of lower-scoring workloads — while the latter is a legitimate advantage for power-constrained or mobile-adjacent systems. The GTX 960A’s 75 W TDP and lack of external power connectors make it suitable for MXM-based laptops or compact industrial PCs where the RX 6500 XT’s 107 W requirement and dual-slot footprint are prohibitive.

That said, the GTX 960A is end-of-life, released in March 2015, while the RX 6500 XT is also end-of-life but from January 2022. The seven-year gap is evident in every architectural metric. The RX 6500 XT’s 5,400 million transistors on a 6 nm node, 5.765 TFLOPS FP32, and 90.08 GPixel/s pixel rate dwarf the GTX 960A’s 1,870 million transistors, 1.505 TFLOPS, and 18.82 GPixel/s. For gaming, content creation, or compute workloads, the RX 6500 XT is the data-backed winner. The GTX 960A should only be considered for legacy MXM systems where no other option fits.

# FAQ

Q: How much faster is the RX 6500 XT in OpenCL compute?

A: The RX 6500 XT scores 48,289 in Geekbench OpenCL compared to the GTX 960A’s 11,998, a 75.2% delta from the GTX 960A’s perspective. This represents roughly a 4x improvement.

Q: Which GPU has more memory and bandwidth?

A: The RX 6500 XT has 4 GB of GDDR6 with 143.9 GB/s bandwidth, while the GTX 960A has 2 GB of GDDR5 with 80.19 GB/s. The AMD card offers double the capacity and nearly double the bandwidth.

Q: What are the power requirements for each card?

A: The GTX 960A has a 75 W TDP and requires no power connectors, as it is an MXM module. The RX 6500 XT has a 107 W TDP, requires a single 6-pin power connector, and suggests a 300 W PSU.

Q: Does the RX 6500 XT support ray tracing?

A: Yes, the RX 6500 XT includes 16 ray tracing cores and supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). The GTX 960A has no ray tracing cores and is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0).

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The GTX 960A averages 11,998, which is 1.3% higher than the RX 6500 XT’s 11,842. However, the GTX 960A’s average is based on only one benchmark, while the RX 6500 XT’s is derived from ten tests.

Q: What are the process node and transistor differences?

A: The GTX 960A uses a 28 nm process with 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die. The RX 6500 XT uses a 6 nm process with 5,400 million transistors on a smaller 107 mm² die, achieving 50.5M transistors per mm² versus 12.6M.