NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A vs NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q Comparison

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960A and the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q represent two extreme ends of the GPU spectrum, separated by a decade of architectural evolution. The GTX 960A is a compact, 75 W MXM module from the Maxwell era, designed for mobile workstations, while the RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q is a 300 W, dual-slot professional powerhouse built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture. Direct comparison is limited by the fact that each was tested with a different benchmark workload—the GTX 960A runs Geekbench OpenCL, while the RTX PRO 6000D runs 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12—so the data must be interpreted through the lens of their respective performance classes rather than a single unified metric.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 960A wins in the domain of low-power, portable computing. Its 75 W TDP and MXM module form factor make it suitable for systems where space and thermal headroom are at a premium. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, it scores 11998 points, placing it in the 51st percentile of all GPUs. This score is remarkably competitive for its age, as it edges out the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 by 0.3% and the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT by 3.2%. This indicates that for compute workloads that scale well with OpenCL, the GTX 960A holds its own against much newer and larger discrete cards, making it a viable option for legacy mobile workstations or embedded systems where raw compute per watt is valued.

The RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q wins decisively in absolute performance, memory capacity, and modern feature support. Its 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 11088 places it in the 50th percentile, but this is a far more demanding test than the GTX 960A's workload. The RTX PRO 6000D is built for professional visualization, AI inference, and massive data sets, offering 96 GB of GDDR7 memory on a 512-bit bus, delivering 1.79 TB/s of bandwidth. This is a class of performance that the GTX 960A cannot approach, with the RTX PRO 6000D boasting 110.1 TFLOPS of FP32 compute compared to the GTX 960A's 1.505 TFLOPS—a roughly 73x advantage. It also supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2) and features 188 ray tracing cores and 752 tensor cores, enabling workloads that are entirely impossible on the Maxwell-based GTX 960A.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two GPUs is vast. The GTX 960A is built on NVIDIA's Maxwell architecture, fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process node. It contains 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 12.6 million per mm². The chip, codenamed GM107, features 640 shading units, 40 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. It lacks dedicated ray tracing and tensor cores, and its DirectX support is limited to 12 (11_0), which means it cannot leverage the advanced features of modern graphics APIs.

In contrast, the RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q is built on the Blackwell 2.0 architecture, using a 5 nm process node at TSMC. The GB202 chip packs 92,200 million transistors on a 750 mm² die, achieving a transistor density of 122.9 million per mm²—nearly ten times denser than the GTX 960A. This massive chip houses 24,064 shading units, 752 TMUs, 192 ROPs, 188 ray tracing cores, and 752 tensor cores. The architectural leap enables features like DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2), hardware-accelerated ray tracing, and AI acceleration through tensor cores, none of which exist in the Maxwell design. The GTX 960A's memory is 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, while the RTX PRO 6000D uses 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus, a generational shift in both capacity and memory technology.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

Direct head-to-head benchmark data is unavailable in this dataset, as the two GPUs were tested with entirely different workloads. However, the available scores provide a basis for qualitative comparison. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 960A achieves 11998 points, which places it slightly ahead of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 (11960) by 0.3% and ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT (11627) by 3.2%. This suggests that in OpenCL compute tasks, the GTX 960A performs at a level comparable to high-end desktop cards from later generations, despite its aged architecture and lower power envelope.

For the RTX PRO 6000D, the 3DMark Steel Nomad DX12 score of 11088 is its primary metric. This score is essentially identical to its nearest rival, the NVIDIA RTX PRO 6000 Blackwell Max-Q (11088, 0% delta), and it slightly outperforms the AMD Radeon RX 550 (11075) by 0.1%. It also surpasses the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1650 SUPER (11047) by 0.4%, while trailing the AMD FirePro W4300 (11225) by 1.2%. These delta percentages are small, indicating that the RTX PRO 6000D sits in a tight performance cluster around the 11000-point mark in this particular DX12 test, which is surprising given its enormous hardware resources, suggesting the benchmark may be more dependent on driver optimization or specific workload characteristics than raw compute throughput.

The most significant numerical disparity lies in raw specifications rather than benchmark scores. The RTX PRO 6000D's FP32 throughput of 110.1 TFLOPS dwarfs the GTX 960A's 1.505 TFLOPS. Similarly, the texture rate of 1,720.6 GTexel/s versus 47.04 GTexel/s, and the pixel rate of 439.3 GPixel/s versus 18.82 GPixel/s, illustrate a gap of over an order of magnitude in every measurable throughput category.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification field. The GTX 960A operates at a base clock of 1097 MHz with a boost of 1176 MHz, while the RTX PRO 6000D runs at 1590 MHz base and 2288 MHz boost. Memory configurations are starkly different: the GTX 960A has 2 GB of GDDR5 at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), providing 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth over a 128-bit bus; the RTX PRO 6000D has 96 GB of GDDR7 at 1750 MHz (28 Gbps effective), delivering 1.79 TB/s over a 512-bit bus. The GTX 960A's power draw is 75 W with no power connectors, whereas the RTX PRO 6000D draws 300 W and requires a single 16-pin connector with a suggested 700 W PSU. The GTX 960A uses an MXM-B (3.0) interface, while the RTX PRO 6000D uses PCIe 5.0 x16. Display outputs also vary: the GTX 960A is "Portable Device Dependent," while the RTX PRO 6000D offers 4x DisplayPort 2.1b. Physical dimensions are only provided for the RTX PRO 6000D (267 mm length, 111 mm height, 40 mm width), which is a dual-slot card, whereas the GTX 960A is an MXM module. The production status differs as well, with the GTX 960A marked as end-of-life and the RTX PRO 6000D active. The release dates are separated by roughly a decade: March 2015 for the GTX 960A and March 2025 for the RTX PRO 6000D.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has a higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The RTX PRO 6000D Blackwell Max-Q offers 110.1 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, compared to the GTX 960A's 1.505 TFLOPS, representing a massive generational leap.

Q: How much memory bandwidth does each card provide?

A: The GTX 960A delivers 80.19 GB/s via 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, while the RTX PRO 6000D provides 1.79 TB/s using 96 GB of GDDR7 on a 512-bit bus.

Q: Do these GPUs support hardware ray tracing?

A: No. The GTX 960A has no ray tracing cores and uses the Maxwell architecture. The RTX PRO 6000D includes 188 dedicated ray tracing cores as part of the Blackwell 2.0 architecture.

Q: Which card is more energy-efficient based on the data?

A: The GTX 960A has a 75 W TDP and achieves a Geekbench OpenCL score of 11998, while the RTX PRO 6000D has a 300 W TDP and scores 11088 in 3DMark Steel Nomad, though the workloads are not directly comparable.

Q: What is the transistor density difference between the two chips?

A: The GTX 960A's GM107 chip has a density of 12.6 million transistors per mm², while the RTX PRO 6000D's GB202 chip achieves 122.9 million transistors per mm².

Q: Are there any benchmark results where the GTX 960A outperforms its rivals?

A: Yes, in Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 960A scores 11998, which is 0.3% higher than the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 and 3.2% higher than the AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT.