GeForce GTX 960A vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
GeForce GTX 960A
Popular choices:
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
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 GTX 960A is positioned at rank 270 and the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is on rank 150, so the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 960A
Performance Per Dollar Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 uses modern memory architecture. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 960A lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 960A is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.2% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 960A | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) (10nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $50 versus $60 for the GeForce GTX 960A, it costs 17% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 17.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 960A | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+17.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($60) | ✅More affordable ($50) |
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 GTX 960A and Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
GeForce GTX 960A
The GeForce GTX 960A is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 13 2015. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 1029 MHz to 1085 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,465 points.
Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is manufactured by an unknown manufacturer. It was released in August 15 2020. It features the Gen. 11 Ice Lake architecture. It has 96 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 10 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,390 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 960A scores 3,465 and the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 reaches 3,390 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 960A is built on Maxwell while the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 uses Gen. 11 Ice Lake, both on 28 nm vs 10 nm. Shader units: 640 (GeForce GTX 960A) vs 96 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960A | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,465+2% | 3,390 |
| Architecture | Maxwell | Gen. 11 Ice Lake |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 10 nm |
| Shading Units | 640+567% | 96 |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960A | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 2 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960A | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (GeForce GTX 960A) vs 12.1 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7). Maximum simultaneous displays: 0 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960A | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 | 12.1 |
| Max Displays | 0 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st Gen (GeForce GTX 960A) vs QuickSync (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7). Decoder: NVDEC 1st Gen vs QuickSync.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960A | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 1st Gen | QuickSync |
| Decoder | NVDEC 1st Gen | QuickSync |
| Codecs | — | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 960A draws 75W versus the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7's 30W — a 85.7% difference. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 960A) vs 350W (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 1mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960A | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 30W-60% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 1mm | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 85 |
| Perf/Watt | 46.2 | 113.0+145% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 960A launched at $199 MSRP and currently averages $60, while the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 launched at $100 and now averages $50. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 costs 16.7% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 57.8 (GeForce GTX 960A) vs 67.8 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7) — the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 offers 17.3% better value. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2015).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960A | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $199 | $100-50% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $60 | $50-17% |
| Performance per Dollar | 57.8 | 67.8+17% |
| Codename | GM107 | Tiger Lake Xe |
| Release | March 13 2015 | August 15 2020 |
| Ranking | #546 | #508 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX 960A and Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
