GeForce GTX 960M vs Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
GeForce GTX 960M
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 960M is positioned at rank 35 and the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is on rank 150, so the GeForce GTX 960M 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 960M
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 960M lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.4% 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 | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.4%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.4%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) | Gen. 11 Ice Lake (2019−2022) (10nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Although it costs $50 (vs $50), its significant performance lead justifies the premium, offering 0.4% better value per dollar than the GeForce GTX 960M.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 960M | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+0.4%) |
| 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 960M and Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
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.
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 960M scores 3,375 and the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 reaches 3,390 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.4% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 960M 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 960M) vs 96 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960M | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 3,375 | 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 960M | 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)
The GeForce GTX 960M comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 960M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960M | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 960M) vs 12.1 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7). Vulkan: 1.3 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960M | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.3+8% | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC (4th Gen) (GeForce GTX 960M) vs QuickSync (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7). Decoder: NVDEC (1st Gen) vs QuickSync. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,H.265 (GeForce GTX 960M) vs H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,MPEG-2 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960M | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC (4th Gen) | QuickSync |
| Decoder | NVDEC (1st Gen) | QuickSync |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,VC-1,H.264,H.265 | H.264,H.265,VP9,AV1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 960M 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 960M) vs 350W (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs PCIe-powered. Card length: 0mm vs 0mm, occupying 0 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 82 vs 85.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960M | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 75W | 30W-60% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | PCIe-powered |
| Length | 0mm | 0mm |
| Height | 0mm | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | 82-4% | 85 |
| Perf/Watt | 45.0 | 113.0+151% |
Value Analysis
Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 67.5 (GeForce GTX 960M) vs 67.8 (Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7) — the Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 offers 0.4% better value. The Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 is the newer GPU (2020 vs 2015).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 960M | Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $100 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50 | $50 |
| Performance per Dollar | 67.5 | 67.8 |
| Codename | GM107 | Tiger Lake Xe |
| Release | March 13 2015 | August 15 2020 |
| Ranking | #552 | #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 960M and Tiger Lake-U Xe Graphics G7
