GeForce GTX 960M vs GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2

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. The GeForce GTX 960M is positioned at rank #35 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Great cost-benefit for your build. 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 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 Per Dollar

Based on actual market prices and performance benchmarks.

Performance Comparison

About G3D Mark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

The GeForce GTX 960M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.3% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (4 GB vs 2 GB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2.

Insight	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
Performance	✅Leading raw performance (+1.3%)	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.3%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2011 / Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014))
Ecosystem	Supports FSR Upscaling	Supports FSR Upscaling
VRAM	✅ More VRAM (+100%)	❌ Less VRAM capacity
Efficiency	💡 Excellent Perf/Watt	⚡ Higher Power Consumption
Case Fit	—	📏 Compact / SFF Friendly

💎 Value Proposition

The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 holds the technical lead. Priced at $30 (vs $50), it costs 40% less, resulting in a 64.5% higher cost efficiency score.

Insight	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+64.5%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️Higher upfront cost ($50)	✅More affordable ($30)

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 960M Benchmark Check

GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 960M and GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2

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.

GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2

The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 15 2011. It features the Fermi 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 783 MHz. It has 192 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 106W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,331 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 960M scores 3,375 and the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 reaches 3,331 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 960M is built on Maxwell while the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 uses Fermi 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 40 nm. Shader units: 640 (GeForce GTX 960M) vs 192 (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2). Raw compute: 1.505 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 960M) vs 0.6013 TFLOPS (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2).

Feature	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
G3D Mark Score	3,375+1%	3,331
Architecture	Maxwell	Fermi 2.0
Process Node	28 nm	40 nm
Shading Units	640+233%	192
Compute (TFLOPS)	1.505 TFLOPS+150%	0.6013 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	16
TMUs	40+25%	32
L1 Cache	320 KB+25%	256 KB
L2 Cache	2 MB+700%	0.25 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
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)

The GeForce GTX 960M comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 has 2 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: 2 MB (GeForce GTX 960M) vs 0.25 MB (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2) — the GeForce GTX 960M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+100%	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	2 MB+700%	0.25 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 960M) vs 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 2.

Feature	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (11_0)
Vulkan	1.3+8%	1.2
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
Max Displays	4+100%	2

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC (4th Gen) (GeForce GTX 960M) vs PureVideo HD VP4 (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2). Decoder: NVDEC (1st Gen) vs PureVideo HD VP4. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,H.265 (GeForce GTX 960M) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2).

Feature	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
Encoder	NVENC (4th Gen)	PureVideo HD VP4
Decoder	NVDEC (1st Gen)	PureVideo HD VP4
Codecs	MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,H.265	H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 960M draws 75W versus the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2's 106W — a 34.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 960M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 960M) vs 400W (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 0mm vs 210mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 82 vs 68°C.

Feature	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2
TDP	75W-29%	106W
Recommended PSU	350W-13%	400W
Power Connector	1x 6-pin	1x 6-pin
Length	0mm	210mm
Height	0mm	111mm
Slots	0-100%	2
Temp (Load)	82	68°C-17%
Perf/Watt	45.0+43%	31.4

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 costs 40% less ($20 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 67.5 (GeForce GTX 960M) vs 111.0 (GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2) — the GeForce GTS 450 Rev. 2 offers 64.4% better value. The GeForce GTX 960M is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2011).