GeForce 9650M GS vs GeForce 410M
GeForce 9650M GS
Popular choices:
GeForce 410M
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce 9650M GS is positioned at rank 680 and the GeForce 410M is on rank 56, so the GeForce 410M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9650M GS
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 410M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce 410M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 9650M GS.
| Insight | GeForce 9650M GS | GeForce 410M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
While current pricing data is unavailable, the GeForce 410M remains the clear technical winner. Check real-time availability to determine if the performance gap justifies the market price.
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce 9650M GS and GeForce 410M
GeForce 9650M GS
The GeForce 9650M GS is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 790 MHz to 835 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 270 points.
GeForce 410M
The GeForce 410M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1072 MHz to 1176 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 33W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 271 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce 9650M GS scores 270 and the GeForce 410M reaches 271 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce 9650M GS is built on Kepler while the GeForce 410M uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 768 (GeForce 9650M GS) vs 384 (GeForce 410M). Boost clocks: 835 MHz vs 1176 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GS | GeForce 410M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 270 | 271 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768+100% | 384 |
| Boost Clock | 835 MHz | 1176 MHz+41% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GS | GeForce 410M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GS | GeForce 410M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce 9650M GS) vs 11.0 (GeForce 410M). OpenGL: 3.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GS | GeForce 410M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 11.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.3 | 4.6+39% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: No NVENC (G84) (GeForce 9650M GS) vs None (GeForce 410M). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP2 vs PureVideo VP4. Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,WMV9 (GeForce 9650M GS) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 (GeForce 410M).
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GS | GeForce 410M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | No NVENC (G84) | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP2 | PureVideo VP4 |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,WMV9 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 Part 2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce 9650M GS draws 30W versus the GeForce 410M's 33W — a 9.5% difference. The GeForce 9650M GS is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce 9650M GS) vs 350W (GeForce 410M). Power connectors: Legacy vs Legacy. Typical load temperature: 85°C vs 80°C.
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GS | GeForce 410M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-9% | 33W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | Legacy | Legacy |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | 80°C-6% |
| Perf/Watt | 9.0+10% | 8.2 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 410M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2012).
| Feature | GeForce 9650M GS | GeForce 410M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $199 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | — |
| Codename | N13E-GE | GM108 |
| Release | March 22 2012 | March 13 2015 |
| Ranking | #690 | #847 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce 9650M GS and GeForce 410M
