Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 vs Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900

► remove Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900

The Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 900 (also known as GMA 900) is an integrated (onboard) graphic chip on the Mobile Intel 915GM chipset for Intel processors. It does not support hardware T&L (Transform & Lightning) calculations (which is required for some games).

It supports DirectX 9.0 with Shader Model 2.0 (Vertex Shader are calculated in Software - by the CPU) and OpenGL 1.4. Furthermore, the chip is able to accelerate the decoding of MPEG2 videos and supports Motion Compensation.

The GMA 900 can not be described as a graphics card that is sufficient for gamers. Still Intel published a list  of games that will run (not needingly beautiful) on the notebook. Some old 3D games and especially 2D games should run without problems. The advantage of integrated graphics cards, is that they have a low power consumtion and therefore save battery life. Furthermore, the laptop may stay cooler and more silent than laptops with dedicated graphics cards. For office programs and surfing the performance is more than sufficient.

Currently there are no drivers that support Aero Glass for Windows Vista.

Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

► remove Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

The Intel Graphics Media Accelerator 950 (also known as Intel GMA 950) is an integrated (onboard) graphic chip on the Mobile Intel 945Gx chipset for Intel processors. It is a faster clocked version of the GMA 900 and does not support hardware T&L (Transform & Lightning) calculations (which is required for some games). Compared to the GMA 900 it now supports Shader Model 3.0 (instead of 2.0) and can decode 2 HD Streams simultaneously.

It supports DirectX 9.0 with Shader Model 3.0 (Vertex Shader are calculated in Software - by the CPU) and OpenGL 1.4. Furthermore, the chip is able to accelerate the decoding of MPEG2 videos and supports Motion Compensation (2 HD Streams simultaneously). Modern HD videos in MPEG 4 or VC-1 can not be decoded with the graphics card. 

The GMA 950 is integrated in the following chipsets with different rendering clock rates (that affect the 3D performance):

  • 945GU: 133 MHz (Lakeport for Intel A100 and A110)
  • 945GSE: 166 MHz (for Atom)
  • 945GMS: 166 MHz / 250 MHz (1.05V)
  • 940GML 166 MHz / 200 MHz (1.05V) - Celeron M (ULV)
  • 943GML: 200 MHz
  • 945GM: 250 MHz (Calistoga)
  • 945G, 945GC, 945GZ: 400 MHz (Lakeport)

Using the GMABooster tool, slower variants can be clocked to 400 MHz to increase the 3D performance (use at your own risk, not supported by Intel!).

The GMA 950 can not be described as a graphics card that is sufficient for gamers. Still Intel published a list  of games that will run (not needingly beautiful) on the notebook (list is for the GMA 900). Some old 3D games and especially 2D games should run without problems. The advantage of integrated graphics cards, is that they have a low power consumtion and therefore save battery life. Furthermore, the laptop may stay cooler and more silent than laptops with dedicated graphics cards. For office programs and surfing the performance is more than sufficient.

The newest drivers support Windows Vista with Aero Glass effects and according to some of our readers it should run fluently.

Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
ManufacturerIntelIntel
GMA Series
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 4700MHD (compare) 10 @ 640 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 4500MHD (compare) 10 @ 533 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 4500M (compare) 10 @ 400 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 (compare) 8 @ 500 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 4/0 cores @ 250 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 4/0 cores @ 400 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 600 (compare) 4 @ 400 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 500 (compare) 4 @ 200 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 4700MHD (compare) 10 @ 640 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 4500MHD (compare) 10 @ 533 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 4500M (compare) 10 @ 400 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) X3100 (compare) 8 @ 500 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 4/0 cores @ 250 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 4/0 cores @ 400 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 600 (compare) 4 @ 400 MHz
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 500 (compare) 4 @ 200 MHz
CodenameGMA 900GMA 950
4 / 0 4 / 0
Core400 MHz250 MHz
Memorymit Hauptspeicher geteilt (shared)mit Hauptspeicher geteilt (shared)
nono
DirectXDirectX 9c, 2.0DirectX 9c, 2.0
Technology130 nm130 nm
FeaturesNo Hardware Transform and Lightning Support (T&L), MPEG2 acceleration, Motion CompensationNo Hardware Transform & Lightning (T&L), Hardware Motion Compensation, Hardware MPEG2 acceleration
Introduced01.03.2005 01.03.2005
Manufacturerhttp://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/g...http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/g...
Windows Vista Premium Ready

3DMark 2001SE - Standard 1024x768
min: 1726     avg: 3330     median: 4000 (4%)     max: 4264 Points
min: 653     avg: 3856.7     median: 3009 (3%)     max: 6992 Points
3DMark 03 - Standard 1024x768
min: 289     avg: 736     median: 877 (0%)     max: 900 Points
min: 165     avg: 931.6     median: 751 (0%)     max: 1626 Points
3DMark 05 - Standard 1024x768
min: 200     avg: 234     median: 223 (0%)     max: 279 Points
min: 0     avg: 407.3     median: 424 (1%)     max: 664 Points
3DMark 06 + Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900
+ Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - 3ds Max 1280x1024
0.8 fps (2%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - EnSight 1280x1024
0.4 fps (1%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - Maya 1280x1024
1.4 fps (1%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - Pro/Engeneer 1280x1024
0.5 fps (1%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - SolidWorks 1280x1024
0.8 fps (1%)
SPEC Viewperf 10.0 - UGS Teamcenter 1280x1024
0.1 fps (0%)
Windows Vista Experience Index - GPU Games
2.6 Points (43%)
Windows Vista Experience Index - GPU
3.5 Points (58%)
Cinebench R10 Shading 32Bit + Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900
Shading 32Bit + Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950

Average Benchmarks Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 → 100%

Average Benchmarks Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 → 134%

-
-
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Left 4 Dead

Left 4 Dead

2008
low 640x480
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
2  fps
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
»
Half Life 2 - Lost Coast Benchmark

Half Life 2 - Lost Coast Benchmark

2005
high 1024x768
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
2  fps
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
»
F.E.A.R.

F.E.A.R.

2005
low 640x480
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
19 25 70 ~ 38 fps
med. 800x600
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
2 3 5 ~ 3 fps
high 1024x768
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
1 1 2 ~ 1 fps
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
»
World of Warcraft

World of Warcraft

2005
low 800x600
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
14 16.3 ~ 15 fps
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
»
Doom 3

Doom 3

2004
low 640x480
100%
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900:
2.8  fps
143%
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
2.9 5.5 ~ 4 fps
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900:
»
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
»
Quake 3 Arena - Timedemo

Quake 3 Arena - Timedemo

1999
high 1024x768
100%
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900:
32.1  fps
274%
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
6.1 24.1 57.2 58.2 59 59.8 60.1 72.6 89.1 99.5 108.1 115.5 117.7 118.3 119.6 120.1 123.5 128 130.1 ~ 88 fps
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900:
»
Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950:
»

Average Gaming Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 900 → 100%

Average Gaming Intel Graphics Media Accelerator (GMA) 950 → 209%

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2019, 2018
v1.8.1a
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Graphics Card Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)