GeForce GTX 960M vs GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST

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 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 960M	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST
Performance	❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%)	✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%)
Longevity	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017))	🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018))
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 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 960M	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST
Cost Efficiency	❌Lower cost efficiency	✅Better overall value (+1.2%)
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 960M Benchmark Check

GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

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

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 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.

⚡

Graphics Performance

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

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

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

Feature	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST
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 960M comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST 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 0.38 MB (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST) — the GeForce GTX 960M has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST
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+426%	0.38 MB

🖥️

Display & API Support

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

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

🎬

Media & Encoding

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

Feature	GeForce GTX 960M	GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST
Encoder	NVENC (4th Gen)	NVENC 1st gen
Decoder	NVDEC (1st Gen)	PureVideo VP5
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 GTX 650 Ti BOOST's 134W — a 56.5% difference. The GeForce GTX 960M is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 960M) vs 450W (GeForce GTX 650 Ti BOOST). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs 1x 6-pin. Card length: 0mm vs 241mm, occupying 0 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 82 vs 97°C.

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

💰

Value Analysis

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