
GRID M60-2Q vs GeForce GTX 950

GRID M60-2Q
Popular choices:

GeForce GTX 950
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. The GRID M60-2Q is positioned at rank #305 in our cost-efficiency ranking, representing a Lower cost-benefit for your build. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GRID M60-2Q
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 950 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 3% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GRID M60-2Q offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GRID M60-2Q | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-3%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / Maxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 950 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 950 holds the technical lead. Priced at $48 (vs $150), it costs 68% less, resulting in a 221.7% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GRID M60-2Q | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+221.7%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($150) | ✅More affordable ($48) |
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 GRID M60-2Q and GeForce GTX 950

GRID M60-2Q
The GRID M60-2Q is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 30 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 557 MHz to 1178 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 225W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,203 points.

GeForce GTX 950
The GeForce GTX 950 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in August 20 2015. It features the Maxwell 2.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 1024 MHz to 1188 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 90W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,357 points. Launch price was $159.
Graphics Performance
The GRID M60-2Q scores 5,203 and the GeForce GTX 950 reaches 5,357 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GRID M60-2Q is built on Maxwell 2.0 while the GeForce GTX 950 uses Maxwell 2.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,048 (GRID M60-2Q) vs 768 (GeForce GTX 950). Raw compute: 4.825 TFLOPS (GRID M60-2Q) vs 1.825 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 950). Boost clocks: 1178 MHz vs 1188 MHz.
| Feature | GRID M60-2Q | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,203 | 5,357+3% |
| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | Maxwell 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2048+167% | 768 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 4.825 TFLOPS+164% | 1.825 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 1178 MHz | 1188 MHz |
| ROPs | 64+100% | 32 |
| TMUs | 128+167% | 48 |
| L1 Cache | 768 KB+167% | 288 KB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GRID M60-2Q | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GRID M60-2Q comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 950 has 2 GB. The GRID M60-2Q offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 2 MB (GRID M60-2Q) vs 1 MB (GeForce GTX 950) — the GRID M60-2Q has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GRID M60-2Q | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 4 GB+100% | 2 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GRID M60-2Q draws 225W versus the GeForce GTX 950's 90W — a 85.7% difference. The GeForce GTX 950 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GRID M60-2Q) vs 350W (GeForce GTX 950). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin.
| Feature | GRID M60-2Q | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 225W | 90W-60% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin |
| Length | — | 202mm |
| Slots | — | 2 |
| Perf/Watt | 23.1 | 59.5+158% |
Value Analysis
The GRID M60-2Q launched at $3000 MSRP and currently averages $150, while the GeForce GTX 950 launched at $159 and now averages $48. The GeForce GTX 950 costs 68% less ($102 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 34.7 (GRID M60-2Q) vs 111.6 (GeForce GTX 950) — the GeForce GTX 950 offers 221.6% better value.
| Feature | GRID M60-2Q | GeForce GTX 950 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $3000 | $159-95% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $150 | $48-68% |
| Performance per Dollar | 34.7 | 111.6+222% |
| Codename | GM204 | GM206 |
| Release | August 30 2015 | August 20 2015 |
| Ranking | #433 | #425 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















