GeForce 9600 GSO vs GeForce GT 520

GeForce 9600 GSO
Memory: 384Mb GDDR3DESKTOP
Release date: 28 Apr 2008
GeForce 9600 GSO
GeForce GT 520
Memory: 1024Mb DDR3DESKTOP
Release date: 13 Apr 2011
GeForce GT 520

Summary

Reasons to consider GeForce 9600 GSO

Higher theoretical gaming performance, based on specifications.
Based on an outdated architecture (Nvidia Tesla), there are no performance optimizations for current games and applications
PhysX support, however PhysX performance on newest games may be poor

Reasons to consider GeForce GT 520

55 watts lower power draw. This might be a strong point if your current power supply is not enough to handle the GeForce 9600 GSO .
This is a much newer product, it might have better long term support.
Supports PhysX
Based on an outdated architecture (Nvidia Fermi), there are no performance optimizations for current games and applications

GeForce 9600 GSO

HWBench recommends GeForce 9600 GSO

Based on theoretical specifications.


Specifications

Core Configuration

GeForce 9600 GSOGeForce GT 520
GPU NameG92 ()vsGF119 (GF119-300-A1)
Fab Process65 nmvs40 nm
Die Size324 mm²vs79 mm²
Transistors754 millionvs292 million
Shaders96vs48
Compute Units6vs1
Core clock550 MHzvs810 MHz
ROPs12vs4
TMUs48vs8

Memory Configuration

GeForce 9600 GSOGeForce GT 520
Memory TypeGDDR3vsDDR3
Bus Width192 bitvs64 bit
Memory Speed800 MHz
1600 MHz effective
vs900 MHz
1800 MHz effective
Memory Size384 Mbvs1024 Mb

Additional details

GeForce 9600 GSOGeForce GT 520
TDP84 wattsvs29 watts
Release Date28 Apr 2008vs13 Apr 2011

Raw Performance comparison

Pixel Rate

  • GeForce 9600 GSO
    6.60 GP/s
  • GeForce GT 520
    1.62 GP/s

GigaPixels - higher is better

Texel Rate

  • GeForce 9600 GSO
    26.40 GT/s
  • GeForce GT 520
    6.48 GT/s

GigaTexels - higher is better

Memory bandwidth

  • GeForce 9600 GSO
    38.40 GB/s
  • GeForce GT 520
    14.40 GB/s

GB/s - higher is better

Single precision performance

  • GeForce 9600 GSO
    264.00 GFLOPs
  • GeForce GT 520
    155.50 GFLOPs

GFLOPs - higher is better