NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M vs NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M compare to the NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3050 A Mobile in overall benchmark scores?

A: The GTX 960M has an average benchmark score of 9,645, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile averages 8,746. The RTX 3050 A Mobile sits at the 44th percentile of all GPUs, and the GTX 960M sits at the 46th percentile.

Q: Which GPU wins in the Geekbench OpenCL test?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile wins decisively, scoring 52,998 versus 11,045 for the GTX 960M. This represents a 79.2% advantage for the RTX 3050 A Mobile in this specific test.

Q: What are the nearest rivals for each GPU according to the database?

A: For the GTX 960M, the nearest rivals are the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 (within 0.1%), AMD Radeon Pro WX 2100 (0.1% behind), NVIDIA Quadro P4000 (0.2% behind), and NVIDIA Tesla C2070 (0.7% behind). For the RTX 3050 A Mobile, they are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 (0% difference), NVIDIA Quadro P2200 (0.7% ahead), AMD Radeon R9 M265X (1.2% behind), and AMD Radeon Pro WX 5100 (1.3% behind).

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two cards?

A: The GTX 960M offers 80.19 GB/s of bandwidth with GDDR5 memory, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile provides 192.0 GB/s with GDDR6 memory. Both use a 128-bit bus.

Q: Do both GPUs support the same DirectX version?

A: No. The GTX 960M supports DirectX 12 (11_0), while the RTX 3050 A Mobile supports DirectX 12 Ultimate (12_2). Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan 1.4.

Q: Which GPU has more shading units?

A: The RTX 3050 A Mobile has 1,792 shading units, compared to 640 for the GTX 960M. The RTX 3050 A Mobile also has 56 texture mapping units versus 40, and 32 ROPs versus 16.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs come from completely different architectural eras. The GTX 960M is built on the Maxwell architecture, using the GM107 chip manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. The RTX 3050 A Mobile uses the Ampere architecture, built on the GA106 chip produced by Samsung on an 8 nm node. This process shrink allows the RTX 3050 A Mobile to pack 12,000 million transistors into a 276 mm² die, while the GTX 960M contains 1,870 million transistors on a 148 mm² die. The transistor density tells the story clearly: the RTX 3050 A Mobile reaches 43.5M transistors per mm², versus 12.6M per mm² for the GTX 960M.

The RTX 3050 A Mobile adds hardware features that simply did not exist in the Maxwell generation. It includes 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores, both absent from the GTX 960M. The Ampere part also delivers FP16 performance at a 1:1 ratio with FP32, reaching 4.813 TFLOPS in both precisions. The GTX 960M lists no FP16 capability, with FP32 at 1.505 TFLOPS. The RTX 3050 A Mobile also doubles the ROP count to 32 and increases TMUs to 56.

Memory technology also separates these two. The GTX 960M uses GDDR5 at 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective), while the RTX 3050 A Mobile uses GDDR6 at 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective). Both have 4 GB of memory on a 128-bit bus, but the newer memory standard gives the RTX 3050 A Mobile 192.0 GB/s of bandwidth compared to 80.19 GB/s. The bus interface differs as well: the GTX 960M uses MXM-B (3.0), while the RTX 3050 A Mobile uses PCIe 4.0 x8.

The power profiles are interesting. The GTX 960M has a 75 W TDP and uses an MXM Module slot width, while the RTX 3050 A Mobile has a lower 45 W TDP despite its larger transistor count and higher performance, and is listed as IGP. Neither card requires power connectors. The GTX 960M belongs to the GeForce 900M generation, with the GeForce 800M as its predecessor and GeForce 10 Mobile as its successor. The RTX 3050 A Mobile is part of the GeForce 30-series, with the GeForce 20 Mobile as its predecessor and no listed successor.

The Verdict

The recorded data paints a nuanced picture. In the single head-to-head benchmark available, the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX 3050 A Mobile wins by a massive 79.2% margin, scoring 52,998 against 11,045. That is a 4.8x raw score advantage. In raw compute terms, the RTX 3050 A Mobile produces 4.813 TFLOPS of FP32 performance versus 1.505 TFLOPS, and it more than doubles the pixel rate (42.98 GPixel/s versus 18.82 GPixel/s) and texture rate (75.21 GTexel/s versus 47.04 GTexel/s).

However, the average benchmark scores tell a different story. The GTX 960M averages 9,645, which is actually higher than the RTX 3050 A Mobile's 8,746 average. The GTX 960M also sits at a higher percentile rank (46th versus 44th). The RTX 3050 A Mobile's average is dragged down by its PassMark DirectX scores: 61 in DirectX 10, 94 in DirectX 11, 55 in DirectX 12, and 152 in DirectX 9. Its PassMark G3D score of 11,664 is strong, but the legacy DirectX results are low. The PassMark G2D score is 526 and GPU compute score is 4,419.

Who should pick which? Users who prioritize modern workloads, ray tracing capable hardware, tensor cores, and the highest possible OpenCL compute should choose the RTX 3050 A Mobile. Its 14 RT cores and 56 tensor cores are not present in the GTX 960M at all. Users running DirectX 12 Ultimate content will need the RTX 3050 A Mobile, since the GTX 960M only reaches DirectX 12 (11_0). On the other hand, the GTX 960M has a higher average benchmark score and better percentile placement, so for workloads that resemble the broader benchmark suite, it may hold up better. The GTX 960M also has a lower launch date, coming out in March 2015, and is end-of-life, as is the RTX 3050 A Mobile, which released in December 2023.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category.

• Chip and architecture: GM107 (Maxwell) versus GA106 (Ampere).
• Process node: 28 nm (TSMC) versus 8 nm (Samsung).
• Transistors: 1,870 million versus 12,000 million.
• Die size: 148 mm² versus 276 mm².
• Transistor density: 12.6M per mm² versus 43.5M per mm².
• Base clock: 1097 MHz versus 1065 MHz.
• Boost clock: 1176 MHz versus 1343 MHz.
• Memory clock: 1253 MHz (5 Gbps effective) versus 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective).
• Memory type: GDDR5 versus GDDR6.
• Memory bandwidth: 80.19 GB/s versus 192.0 GB/s.
• Shading units: 640 versus 1,792.
• TMUs: 40 versus 56.
• ROPs: 16 versus 32.
• RT cores: None versus 14.
• Tensor cores: None versus 56.
• Pixel rate: 18.82 GPixel/s versus 42.98 GPixel/s.
• Texture rate: 47.04 GTexel/s versus 75.21 GTexel/s.
• FP32: 1.505 TFLOPS versus 4.813 TFLOPS.
• FP16: Not listed versus 4.813 TFLOPS (1:1).
• TDP: 75 W versus 45 W.
• Slot width: MXM Module versus IGP.
• Bus interface: MXM-B (3.0) versus PCIe 4.0 x8.
• DirectX: 12 (11_0) versus 12 Ultimate (12_2).
• Release date: March 2015 versus December 2023.
• Predecessor: GeForce 800M versus GeForce 20 Mobile.

Both cards share 4 GB of memory, a 128-bit bus, no power connectors, no suggested PSU, portable-device-dependent display outputs, OpenGL 4.6, Vulkan 1.4, and end-of-life production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains one direct head-to-head benchmark result: Geekbench OpenCL. The RTX 3050 A Mobile scores 52,998, and the GTX 960M scores 11,045. The delta percentage is -79.2% from the perspective of the RTX 3050 A Mobile, meaning the GTX 960M is 79.2% behind. In absolute terms, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is 4.8 times faster in this test.

This single result aligns with the raw compute specifications. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's FP32 output of 4.813 TFLOPS is roughly 3.2 times the GTX 960M's 1.505 TFLOPS. Its pixel rate is 2.3 times higher, and its texture rate is 1.6 times higher. Memory bandwidth is 2.4 times higher. The RTX 3050 A Mobile also has 2.8 times more shading units.

The average benchmark scores complicate this picture. The GTX 960M averages 9,645 across its two recorded benchmarks (Geekbench OpenCL at 11,045 and Geekbench Vulkan at 8,245). The RTX 3050 A Mobile averages 8,746 across eight recorded benchmarks, ranging from a low of 55 in PassMark DirectX 12 to a high of 11,664 in PassMark G3D. The RTX 3050 A Mobile's nearest rival in the database is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 460 v2 with a 0% delta, while the GTX 960M's nearest rival is the NVIDIA Quadro K5000 with a 0.1% delta. These rival positions show both GPUs occupy similar mid-range territory despite the architectural gap.

Where Each One Wins

The RTX 3050 A Mobile wins in every modern compute scenario represented in the data. The Geekbench OpenCL result gives it a 79.2% advantage. Its 14 ray tracing cores and 56 tensor cores open up workloads that the GTX 960M cannot handle at all. Its DirectX 12 Ultimate support means it is ready for the latest graphics feature set, where the GTX 960M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0). The higher memory bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s versus 80.19 GB/s benefits texture-heavy and high-resolution workloads. The 1:1 FP16 ratio also makes it better suited for mixed-precision compute.

The GTX 960M wins in the context of the database's aggregate scores. Its 9,645 average beats the RTX 3050 A Mobile's 8,746, and its 46th percentile placement beats the 44th percentile. Its nearest rival deltas are all within 0.7%, showing tight competition around its performance class. The GTX 960M also has a higher base clock (1097 MHz versus 1065 MHz), though the RTX 3050 A Mobile has a higher boost clock (1343 MHz versus 1176 MHz). The GTX 960M is also the older product, so it may be relevant for systems with MXM slots, given its MXM-B (3.0) interface and MXM Module slot width.

The PassMark legacy DirectX scores favor the GTX 960M indirectly, since the RTX 3050 A Mobile's DirectX 9, 10, 11, and 12 scores are all low (152, 61, 94, and 55 respectively), which drags its average down. For users who run legacy DirectX applications, the RTX 3050 A Mobile's low scores suggest it is not optimized for those paths. The GTX 960M, with no PassMark scores recorded, avoids this penalty entirely. For pure modern OpenCL compute, the RTX 3050 A Mobile is the clear choice. For overall average performance in the database's mixed benchmark suite, the GTX 960M holds the edge.