GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST vs GeForce GTX 960M

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.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 960M

#25

Radeon RX 550X (móvel)

MSRP: $35|Avg: $35

161%

#27

GeForce GTX 1070 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

146%

#28

GeForce GTX 1060 with Max-Q Design

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

145%

#32

GeForce GTX 1050 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

132%

#33

Radeon RX 6300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $40

131%

#35

GeForce GTX 960M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $50

100%

#37

UHD Graphics 730 (Rocket Lake)

MSRP: $50|Avg: $50

98%

#46

Radeon RX 5500M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $100

88%

#48

GeForce GTX 980 (móvel)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $150

87%

#49

GeForce 610M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $20

87%

#50

GeForce GTX 1650 (Mobile)

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $75

86%

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce GTX 960M offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.

Insight	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 960M
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	❌ Less VRAM capacity	✅ More VRAM (+100%)
Efficiency	⚡ Higher Power Consumption	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt
Case Fit	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly	—

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST holds the technical lead. Priced at $50 (vs $50), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 1.2% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 960M
Cost Efficiency	✅Better overall value (+1.2%)	❌Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	Equivalent pricing	Equivalent pricing

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.

GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 960M Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST and GeForce GTX 960M

GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST

The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 26 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 980 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 134W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,415 points. Launch price was $169.

GeForce GTX 960M

The GeForce GTX 960M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1096 MHz to 1176 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,375 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST scores 3,415 and the GeForce GTX 960M reaches 3,375 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST is built on Kepler while the GeForce GTX 960M uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 640 (GeForce GTX 960M). Raw compute: 1.585 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 1.505 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 960M). Boost clocks: 1033 MHz vs 1176 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 960M
G3D Mark Score	3,415+1%	3,375
Architecture	Kepler	Maxwell
Process Node	28 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	768+20%	640
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.585 TFLOPS+5%	1.505 TFLOPS
Boost Clock	1033 MHz	1176 MHz+14%
ROPs	24+50%	16
TMUs	64+60%	40
L1 Cache	64 KB	320 KB+400%
L2 Cache	0.38 MB	2 MB+426%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 960M
Upscaling Tech	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)	FSR 2.1 (Compatible)
Frame Generation	FSR 3 (Compatible)	FSR 3 (Compatible)
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	Standard	Standard

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 960M has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX 960M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.38 MB (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 2 MB (GeForce GTX 960M) — the GeForce GTX 960M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 960M
VRAM Capacity	2 GB	4 GB+100%
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	0.38 MB	2 MB+426%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (FL 11_0) (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 960M). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.4 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 960M
DirectX	12 (FL 11_0)	12 (11_0)
Vulkan	1.1	1.3+18%
OpenGL	4.4	4.6+5%
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st gen (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs NVENC (4th Gen) (GeForce GTX 960M). Decoder: PureVideo VP5 vs NVDEC (1st Gen). Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,H.265 (GeForce GTX 960M).

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 960M
Encoder	NVENC 1st gen	NVENC (4th Gen)
Decoder	PureVideo VP5	NVDEC (1st Gen)
Codecs	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2	MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,H.265

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST draws 134W versus the GeForce GTX 960M's 75W — a 56.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 960M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 450W (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 960M). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 241mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 97°C vs 82.

Feature	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST	GeForce GTX 960M
TDP	134W	75W-44%
Recommended PSU	450W	350W-22%
Power Connector	1x 6-pin	1x 6-pin
Length	241mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	97°C	82-15%
Perf/Watt	25.5	45.0+76%

💰

Value Analysis

Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 68.3 (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) vs 67.5 (GeForce GTX 960M) — the GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST offers 1.2% better value. The GeForce GTX 960M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).