NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 vs NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile Comparison

The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 represent two distinct eras of GPU design, separated by roughly six years of architectural evolution. The data shows a decisive performance gap, but the comparison is not purely about speed; it also highlights fundamental shifts in process technology, feature sets, and target use cases. The RTX A2000 Mobile is an end-of-life professional mobile solution built on Ampere, while the GTX 950 is an end-of-life desktop consumer card from the Maxwell 2.0 generation. Benchmark results indicate that the newer mobile part utterly dominates the older desktop card in raw compute, yet the GTX 950 retains its own niche as a low-power legacy option.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data available for these two GPUs is limited to two compute-oriented tests, but the results are stark. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the RTX A2000 Mobile scores 56,518 points, while the GTX 950 manages just 15,662 points. This represents a delta of 260.9% in favor of the RTX A2000 Mobile. To put that in context, the RTX A2000 Mobile is not merely faster; it is performing at a level that is more than three and a half times higher than the GTX 950 in this synthetic compute workload. The RTX A2000 Mobile’s average benchmark score of 13,821 across all tests further confirms its standing, placing it in the 55th percentile of all GPUs, while the GTX 950’s average of 13,189 puts it in the 53rd percentile.

The second head-to-head test, Geekbench Vulkan, tells a similar story. The RTX A2000 Mobile scores 53,146 points, compared to the GTX 950’s 16,734 points, yielding a 217.6% advantage for the newer card. This is a significant margin that suggests the RTX A2000 Mobile’s architecture handles modern API workloads with far greater efficiency. The wins tally for this comparison is 2 for the RTX A2000 Mobile and 0 for the GTX 950. It is notably the GTX 950 does have a Geekbench Metal score of 7,172, but the RTX A2000 Mobile has no corresponding Metal result in the data, so a direct comparison on that API is not possible.

Looking at the RTX A2000 Mobile’s nearest rivals, its average score of 13,821 is just 0.1% ahead of the AMD Radeon 660M (13,812) and only 0.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT (13,745). It trails the AMD Radeon RX 570X by 0.4% and the NVIDIA Tesla K10 by 1.5%. This suggests that while the RTX A2000 Mobile is a strong performer, its average score places it in a tight cluster of mid-range and high-end cards, rather than at the absolute top. For the GTX 950, its average of 13,189 is 0.8% behind the GeForce GTX 480 and 1% behind the Radeon Pro 555X, but it is 0.9% ahead of the Tesla M2090 and 1.2% ahead of the FirePro M6100. These deltas are small, indicating the GTX 950 is competitively positioned among its immediate peers, despite being far older than most of them.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is profound. The RTX A2000 Mobile is built on the GA107 chip using the Ampere architecture, fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung. This process node allows for a transistor count of 8,700 million packed into a die size of 200 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 43.5 million per square millimeter. In contrast, the GTX 950 uses the GM206 chip based on the Maxwell 2.0 architecture, manufactured on a 28 nm process at TSMC. This older node holds 2,940 million transistors on a larger 228 mm² die, giving a transistor density of just 12.9 million per square millimeter. The RTX A2000 Mobile’s density advantage is roughly 3.4 times that of the GTX 950, which explains a significant portion of its performance lead.

The memory subsystems are also from different generations. The RTX A2000 Mobile features 4 GB of GDDR6 memory on a 128-bit bus, delivering a bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s. The GTX 950 offers 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on the same 128-bit bus, but its bandwidth is capped at 105.8 GB/s. The RTX A2000 Mobile’s memory clock is listed as 1500 MHz with 12 Gbps effective, while the GTX 950 runs its memory at 1653 MHz with 6.6 Gbps effective. This means the newer card has nearly double the memory bandwidth, which is critical for compute-heavy and high-resolution workloads.

Core counts show an even larger disparity. The RTX A2000 Mobile has 2,560 shading units, 80 texture mapping units (TMUs), and 48 render output units (ROPs). It also includes 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, which are entirely absent from the GTX 950. The GTX 950, by comparison, has 768 shading units, 48 TMUs, and 32 ROPs. The pixel rate for the RTX A2000 Mobile is 80.98 GPixel/s, versus 38.02 GPixel/s for the GTX 950, and the texture rate is 135.0 GTexel/s versus 57.02 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute performance is 8.637 TFLOPS for the RTX A2000 Mobile, which is roughly 4.7 times the GTX 950’s 1.825 TFLOPS. The RTX A2000 Mobile also supports FP16 at 1:1 ratio with 8.637 TFLOPS, while the GTX 950 has no listed FP16 capability.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher FP32 compute performance?

A: The NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile delivers 8.637 TFLOPS of FP32 performance, which is dramatically higher than the GTX 950’s 1.825 TFLOPS. This makes the RTX A2000 Mobile approximately 4.7 times faster in raw single-precision compute.

Q: Does the GTX 950 support ray tracing or tensor cores?

A: No. The GTX 950 has no ray tracing cores and no tensor cores listed in its specifications. The RTX A2000 Mobile, on the other hand, includes 20 ray tracing cores and 80 tensor cores, enabling hardware-accelerated ray tracing and AI-based features that the GTX 950 cannot perform.

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

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile has a memory bandwidth of 192.0 GB/s using GDDR6 memory, whereas the GTX 950’s GDDR5 memory provides only 105.8 GB/s. This gives the RTX A2000 Mobile about 82% more bandwidth, which is beneficial for memory-intensive tasks.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the GTX 950 wins?

A: In the available head-to-head benchmark data, there are no wins for the GTX 950. The RTX A2000 Mobile wins both the Geekbench OpenCL and Geekbench Vulkan tests. The GTX 950 does have a Geekbench Metal score of 7,172, but no comparable Metal score exists for the RTX A2000 Mobile.

Q: How does the RTX A2000 Mobile compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile’s average benchmark score of 13,821 is nearly identical to the AMD Radeon 660M (13,812) and the AMD Radeon RX 7900 XT (13,745), with deltas of 0.1% and 0.6% respectively. It is slightly behind the AMD Radeon RX 570X by 0.4%.

Q: What are the process node and die size differences?

A: The RTX A2000 Mobile is fabricated on an 8 nm process at Samsung with a 200 mm² die. The GTX 950 uses a 28 nm process at TSMC with a larger 228 mm² die. This leads to a transistor density of 43.5M per mm² for the RTX A2000 Mobile, versus 12.9M per mm² for the GTX 950.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the data, the NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile is the overwhelmingly superior GPU in terms of raw performance and modern feature support. It wins both available head-to-head benchmarks by margins exceeding 200%, offers more than double the memory bandwidth, and provides over four times the FP32 compute throughput. For any workload that leverages OpenCL or Vulkan, the RTX A2000 Mobile is the clear choice. Its inclusion of ray tracing and tensor cores also makes it future-proof for applications that utilize these features, something the GTX 950 cannot offer.

The GTX 950, however, is not without merit. Its lower transistor count and older architecture mean it consumes less power in absolute terms (90 W TDP versus 95 W), and its dual-slot design with a 1x 6-pin power connector makes it a simple drop-in for older systems. Its average benchmark score of 13,189 is only 4.6% lower than the RTX A2000 Mobile’s 13,821, which suggests that in a broad mix of legacy workloads, the gap narrows considerably. The GTX 950’s nearest rivals, such as the GeForce GTX 480, are within 1% of its score, indicating it still holds its own among its contemporaries.

For buyers today, the decision hinges on use case. The RTX A2000 Mobile is the pick for anyone needing maximum compute performance, ray tracing, or tensor core acceleration in a mobile form factor. The GTX 950 is a viable option for those building a budget desktop system focused on older DirectX 11 or OpenGL titles, where its 2 GB of GDDR5 memory and 1.825 TFLOPS are adequate. But the data is unambiguous: the RTX A2000 Mobile is the more capable and future-ready product.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA RTX A2000 Mobile | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 950 |

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

| Chip | GA107 | GM206 |

| Architecture | Ampere | Maxwell 2.0 |

| Process Node | 8 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Samsung | TSMC |

| Transistors | 8,700 million | 2,940 million |

| Die Size | 200 mm² | 228 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 43.5M / mm² | 12.9M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 1215 MHz | 1024 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 1687 MHz | 1188 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1500 MHz (12 Gbps effective) | 1653 MHz (6.6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 4 GB | 2 GB |

| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus Width | 128 bit | 128 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 192.0 GB/s | 105.8 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 2560 | 768 |

| TMUs | 80 | 48 |

| ROPs | 48 | 32 |

| RT Cores | 20 | null |

| Tensor Cores | 80 | null |

| Pixel Rate | 80.98 GPixel/s | 38.02 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 135.0 GTexel/s | 57.02 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 8.637 TFLOPS | 1.825 TFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | 8.637 TFLOPS (1:1) | null |

| TDP | 95 W | 90 W |

| Slot Width | IGP | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin |

| Suggested PSU | null | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 4.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 |

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

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.4 |

| OpenGL Support | 4.6 | 4.6 |

| Release Date | 2021-04-11 | 2015-08-19 |

| Launch MSRP | null | 159 USD |