GeForce GTX 675MX vs Radeon HD 8950

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 675MX

2012Core: 600 MHz

Popular choices:

VS
AMD

Radeon HD 8950

2012Boost: 1250 MHz

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.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.

GeForce GTX 675MX

2012

Why buy it

  • 33.3% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 3 GB).
  • Draws 100W instead of 200W, a 100W reduction.
  • More future proof: Kepler (2012−2018) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

  • Very weak future-proofing: 2012-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
  • Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 5.7 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $499 MSRP).

Radeon HD 8950

2012

Why buy it

  • Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 5.7 vs 0 G3D/$ ($499 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).

Trade-offs

  • Less VRAM, with 3 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
  • Very weak future-proofing: 2012-era hardware with 3 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
  • 100% higher power demand at 200W vs 100W.

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 675MX better than Radeon HD 8950?
Yes, but this is not really about a huge raw performance gap. The broader synthetic picture is also very close at 2,951 vs 2,828 in G3D Mark. The bigger reason to prefer GeForce GTX 675MX is the overall package: you are getting no meaningful modern upscaling stack, plus much lower power draw (100W vs 200W).
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
GeForce GTX 675MX is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more VRAM at 4 GB instead of 3 GB and the stronger feature stack with no meaningful modern upscaling stack instead of FSR upscaling. That extra memory headroom makes it the safer pick for newer games, heavier textures, and higher settings over time.
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
GeForce GTX 675MX is the smarter buy by a wide margin. GeForce GTX 675MX is priced in an unclear MSRP range at an unclear MSRP versus $499 MSRP, and you are getting 4.3% higher G3D Mark. Radeon HD 8950 really only makes sense now as a very cheap stopgap or a used-market placeholder.
Is Radeon HD 8950 still worth buying for gaming in 2026?
No, not for a fresh gaming build. Radeon HD 8950 is 2012 hardware with 3 GB of VRAM, 2,828 in G3D Mark, and FSR upscaling. That is simply too far behind to be an easy modern recommendation.

Games Benchmarks

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 9800X3D 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.

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

PresetGeForce GTX 675MXRadeon HD 8950
1080p
low78 FPS100 FPS
medium68 FPS83 FPS
high53 FPS66 FPS
ultra35 FPS39 FPS
1440p
low70 FPS84 FPS
medium61 FPS71 FPS
high43 FPS49 FPS
ultra28 FPS28 FPS
4K
low25 FPS27 FPS
medium24 FPS26 FPS
high16 FPS17 FPS
ultra14 FPS14 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

PresetGeForce GTX 675MXRadeon HD 8950
1080p
low73 FPS127 FPS
medium49 FPS102 FPS
high36 FPS85 FPS
ultra23 FPS59 FPS
1440p
low40 FPS78 FPS
medium22 FPS56 FPS
high16 FPS42 FPS
ultra12 FPS31 FPS
4K
low14 FPS29 FPS
medium8 FPS20 FPS
high7 FPS16 FPS
ultra5 FPS12 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

PresetGeForce GTX 675MXRadeon HD 8950
1080p
low133 FPS127 FPS
medium106 FPS102 FPS
high89 FPS85 FPS
ultra66 FPS64 FPS
1440p
low100 FPS95 FPS
medium80 FPS76 FPS
high66 FPS64 FPS
ultra50 FPS48 FPS
4K
low66 FPS64 FPS
medium53 FPS51 FPS
high44 FPS42 FPS
ultra33 FPS32 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

PresetGeForce GTX 675MXRadeon HD 8950
1080p
low133 FPS127 FPS
medium106 FPS102 FPS
high89 FPS85 FPS
ultra66 FPS64 FPS
1440p
low100 FPS95 FPS
medium80 FPS76 FPS
high66 FPS64 FPS
ultra50 FPS48 FPS
4K
low66 FPS64 FPS
medium51 FPS51 FPS
high41 FPS42 FPS
ultra27 FPS32 FPS

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 675MX and Radeon HD 8950

NVIDIA

GeForce GTX 675MX

The GeForce GTX 675MX is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in October 1 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 600 MHz. It has 960 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 100W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,951 points.

AMD

Radeon HD 8950

The Radeon HD 8950 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 31 2012. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1250 MHz. It has 1792 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 200W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 2,828 points. Launch price was $449.

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 675MX scores 2,951 and the Radeon HD 8950 reaches 2,828 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 4.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 675MX is built on Kepler while the Radeon HD 8950 uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 960 (GeForce GTX 675MX) vs 1,792 (Radeon HD 8950). Raw compute: 1.256 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 675MX) vs 2.867 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 8950).

FeatureGeForce GTX 675MXRadeon HD 8950
G3D Mark Score
2,951+4%
2,828
Architecture
Kepler
GCN 1.0
Process Node
28 nm
28 nm
Shading Units
960
1792+87%
Compute (TFLOPS)
1.256 TFLOPS
2.867 TFLOPS+128%
ROPs
32
32
TMUs
80
112+40%
L1 Cache
80 KB
448 KB+460%
L2 Cache
512 KB
768 KB+50%

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 675MX gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon HD 8950 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

FeatureGeForce GTX 675MXRadeon HD 8950
Upscaling Tech
Upscaling support
FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation
Not Supported
Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction
No
No
Low Latency
NVIDIA Reflex
AMD Anti-Lag
💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 675MX comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon HD 8950 has 3 GB. The GeForce GTX 675MX offers 33.3% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 512 KB (GeForce GTX 675MX) vs 768 KB (Radeon HD 8950) — the Radeon HD 8950 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

FeatureGeForce GTX 675MXRadeon HD 8950
VRAM Capacity
4 GB+33%
3 GB
Memory Type
GDDR5
GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth
Unknown
Unknown
Bus Width
128-bit
256-bit+100%
L2 Cache
512 KB
768 KB+50%
🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 675MX) vs 12_0 (Radeon HD 8950). Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

FeatureGeForce GTX 675MXRadeon HD 8950
DirectX
12 (11_0)
12_0
Max Displays
4
4
🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GTX 675MX) vs VCE 1.0 (Radeon HD 8950). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP5 vs UVD 3.1.

FeatureGeForce GTX 675MXRadeon HD 8950
Encoder
NVENC 1st Gen
VCE 1.0
Decoder
PureVideo HD VP5
UVD 3.1
Codecs
H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 ASP
🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 675MX draws 100W versus the Radeon HD 8950's 200W — a 66.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 675MX is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 675MX) vs 500W (Radeon HD 8950). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs 6-pin + 8-pin.

FeatureGeForce GTX 675MXRadeon HD 8950
TDP
100W-50%
200W
Recommended PSU
350W-30%
500W
Power Connector
1x 6-pin
6-pin + 8-pin
Length
267mm
Slots
0-100%
2
Temp (Load)
85°C
Perf/Watt
29.5+109%
14.1