OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£180VRAM:4 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):120 W

MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 19 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming
5.8/10

Overall score

Score
5.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

40%

3.8

Technical score

25%

8.3

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

3.8

Sentiment score

▼Worse than 91% of graphics cards
7.0

Value for money

Value for money
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components

70%

5.8

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

▼Worse than 75%
3.8

Technical score

Technical score
3.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components

44%

1.9

Performance

24%

2.2

Memory

12%

8.8

Power

11%

6.5

Features

5%

7.0

Design

4%

8.2

Connectivity

▼Worse than 95%
8.3

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▲ Better than 77% of models

80%

8.1

Average grade

20%

9.0

Popularity

Grades by review (19)
13 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 6 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
▲Better than 77%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • msi-geforce-gtx-960-gaming
msi-geforce-gtx-960-gaming
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming

Based on 13 · 7

Reviewers love its quiet fans and cool running, but it struggles at higher resolutions and feels bulky.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming

Based on 198 owners sharing their experience in online comments

73%positive10%mixed17%negative

Owners praise its strong gaming performance and overclocking, while newer games expose its limited speed and VRAM.

What owners dislike

  • Newer demanding games like Cyberpunk 2077 and Witcher 3 often drop to around 30 fps unless settings are lowered or resolution reduced.22
  • The 2GB version runs out of video memory in newer games, causing stutter, crashes, or forced low textures; owners wished they had bought 4GB.6
  • Owners found it only a modest step up from older cards like the 660 Ti or 750 Ti, and it trailed the GTX 970 in speed.4
  • Some owners reported stutters, frame drops, and crashes after overclocking, though others said it ran stable with moderate overclocks.4
  • Owners reported temperatures reaching around 70–80°C under load in demanding games, with some cards running hotter than others in SLI.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming

Technical score
Technical score
3.8/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 95% of models
Score components:

44%

1.9

Performance

24%

2.2

Memory

12%

8.8

Power

11%

6.5

Features

5%

7.0

Design

4%

8.2

Connectivity

3.8
Reviews score
8.3
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
▼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components:

70%

5.8

Overall score

30%

9.6

Price

7.0
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
2,365 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 2,365 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 94.6% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
6,135 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 6,135 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 91.7% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2,801 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 2,801 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 91.9% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
2.36 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 2.36 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 93.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
4 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 4 GB of VRAM, which is less than 87.7% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
112.2 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 112.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 93.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
7,010 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 7,010 MHz, which is slower than that of 89.3% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.4
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.4, which is more advanced than on 20.8% of graphics cards and equal to 79.2% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
4096x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 4096x2160, which is lower than that of 92.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.6% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
5.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 5.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 87.9% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
120 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 120 W, which is lower than that of 82.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.3% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
120 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 120 W under peak load, which is lower than 85.6% of graphics cards and equal to 1.5% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
400 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 400 W PSU, which is lower than that of 90.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.5% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
160 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 160 W, which is lower than that of 71.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 3.7% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
120 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
267x 139x 36 mm
Length
267 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 267 mm long, which is shorter than 59.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 3.5% of graphics cards.
Height
139 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 139 mm tall, which is taller than 78.5% of graphics cards and equal in height to 1% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
586 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 586 g, which is lighter than 87.3% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of Graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say

MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 38.5% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (400 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    400 W vs 650 W
  • 44.2% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (120 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    120 W vs 215 W
  • 15.3% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.3/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 77% of models

    80%

    8.1

    Average grade

    20%

    9.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (19)
    13 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 6 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.3 vs 7.2
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 2.89x cheaper
    MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming is cheaper than the average graphics card (£180 vs £520).
    £180 vs £520
  • 15.3% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.3/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    ▼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    ▲ Better than 77% of models

    80%

    8.1

    Average grade

    20%

    9.0

    Popularity

    Grades by review (19)
    13 reviews: 4 with a printed score, 9 estimated from the review. 6 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.3 vs 7.2
  • 2.89x cheaper
    MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming is cheaper than the average graphics card (£180 vs £520).
    £180 vs £520
  • 0.2% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,753 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,753 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 1 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (1 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    1 vs 0
  • 38.5% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (400 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    400 W vs 650 W
  • 44.2% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (120 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    120 W vs 215 W
  • 27.3% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (160 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    160 W vs 220 W
  • 8.4 dB quieter under load
    This graphics card has a lower load noise level than the average graphics card (27 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    27 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 42.2% lighter
    This graphics card is lighter than the average graphics card (586 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    586 g vs 1,014 g
  • 47.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,304 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,304 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 32 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    8 vs 40
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 41.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,127 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,127 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 120 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (64 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    64 vs 184
  • 51.3% lower sentiment score
    3.8 vs 7.8
  • 6.4% worse value for money
    MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.97 vs 7.4).
    6.97 vs 7.41
  • 47.9% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,304 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,304 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 32 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (8 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    8 vs 40
  • 41.3% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,127 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,127 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 120 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (64 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    64 vs 184
  • 79.4% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (77.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    77.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 75.9% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (38.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    38.9 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 32 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (32 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    32 vs 64
  • 89.6% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (2.4 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    2.36 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 8 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2015 vs 2023).
    January 2015
    2015 vs 2023
  • 72.9% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (6,135 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    6,135 points vs 22,638 points
  • 84% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (2,365 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    2,365 points vs 14,779 points
  • 83.3% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.08 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 76.8% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2,801 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    2,801 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 91.8% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (2.4 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    2.42 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 3,328 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,024 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,024 vs 4,352
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 75% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (112.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    112.2 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 63.1% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (7,010 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    7,010 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 62.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (48 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    48 KB vs 128 KB
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 87.2% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (2,940 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    2,940 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2 vs 2.1a).
    2.0 vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (4096x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    4096x2160 vs 7680x4320
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (2 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    2 vs 6
  • 75% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (5.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    5.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 1 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (2 vs 3).
    2 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • 8 °C higher idle temperature
    This graphics card has a higher idle temperature than the average graphics card (45 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    45 °C vs 37 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.
  • 14 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (139 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    139 mm vs 125 mm

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
Blunty
≈ estimated
09/03/2016
Hands-on review · overclocking, noise and game tests
Verdict
MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming is a powerful, nearly silent card and a strong budget pick if the GTX 970 is out of reach.
9.0
RedGamingTech
≈ estimated
13/07/2015
Hands-on review · 1080p gaming, noise and memory tests
Verdict
MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming offers great value for 1080p gaming, runs quiet and efficient, though AMD cards can compete.
8.0
RedGamingTech
≈ estimated
13/07/2015
Gameplay and benchmarks · 1080p tests in three games
Verdict
MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming runs demanding games well at 1080p on its 2GB of memory and stays quiet under full load.
9.0
Paul's Hardware
≈ estimated
19/04/2015
Hands-on review · GTA V benchmarks and gameplay
Verdict
MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming is a good budget card for GTA V, though MSAA should stay off to keep frame rates high.
9.0
TechteamGB
≈ estimated
04/02/2015
Hands-on review · benchmarks and app tests
Verdict
MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming is a strong 1080p card for its price and should stay capable for a few years.
8.0
Matt's Paddock
≈ estimated
22/01/2015
Unboxing and review · 1080p gaming, temperatures and noise
Verdict
MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming delivers strong 1080p performance on low power, staying quiet and cool, though 2GB of memory may limit it.
9.5
HiTechLegion
≈ estimated
22/01/2015
Hands-on review · benchmarks, noise and overclock tests
Verdict
MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming earns Editor's Choice for quiet, strong performance at this price, with minor drawbacks.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
pcmag.com
✓ explicit
22/01/2015
Lab test · Quiet midrange card
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming 2G is a quiet card for 1080p gamers and League of Legends players, though its 2GB memory may limit newer games.
6.0
bit-tech.net
≈ estimated
26/01/2015
Lab test · Factory-overclocked midrange card
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming 2G is a mid-range card with a modest factory overclock and fans that can switch off, though its bulky cooler needs case room.
9.0
totallydubbed.net
≈ estimated
01/02/2015
Benchmark test · Battlefield 4
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming 2G nearly matches a GTX 680 in average Battlefield 4 frame rates, but its narrower memory bus trails in peak FPS.
9.5
techteamgb.co.uk
≈ estimated
04/02/2015
Hands-on test · Cooling and noise
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming 2G is a strong 1080p card that stays cool and nearly silent, with its fans off at idle and rarely above 65°C.
7.0
tomshardware.com
≈ estimated
15/07/2015
Lab test · Cooling and noise
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming 2G is the quietest GTX 960 tested, with fans barely audible even at full speed, but it draws more power than rivals.
8.5
bit-tech.net
✓ explicit
26/01/2015
Benchmark review · Quiet cooling
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming 2G is a quiet, efficient 1080p card that overclocks well, though its 128-bit memory bus limits 1440p gaming.
6.0
tomshardware.com
≈ estimated
15/07/2015
Lab test · Silent cooling
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming 2G is the pick if silence matters most, but rival cards offer better performance and lower power draw.
overclockers.com
09/02/2015
Not graded yet
8.0
lesnumeriques.com
✓ explicit
03/04/2015
Lab test · Quiet 1080p card
Verdict
The MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming 2G is a very quiet, cool and low-power card for 1080p, but its light factory overclock puts it behind rival overclocked models.
6.0
overclocking.com
≈ estimated
22/01/2015
Lab test · Entry-level gaming card
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming 2G is an overclocked entry-level card with MSI's newest Twin Frozr V cooler, though it is a GTX 980 cut in half.
modding.fr
22/02/2015
Not graded yet
9.0
geeknetic.es
✓ explicit
22/01/2015
Lab test · Overclocking and cooling
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming 2G is a strong overclocker that stays nearly silent, but its 128-bit bus and 2GB memory make 4K gaming a stretch.
9.0
redusers.com
≈ estimated
04/12/2015
Hands-on test · Mid-range 1080p card
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming is a cool, quiet 1080p card that runs most games above 30 fps, though simulated 4K mode needs lower settings to approach 30 fps.
9.5
multiplayer.it
≈ estimated
22/01/2015
Hands-on test · Mid-range gaming card
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming is a quiet 1080p card for mid-range PCs that overclocks past 1500 MHz, though Total War: Rome 2 needs some filters turned down.
6.0
tomshw.it
≈ estimated
07/08/2015
Lab test · Silent 1080p card
Verdict
The MSI GTX 960 Gaming 2G is a silent Full HD card, best if noise matters most, but it is large and draws more power than some rivals.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming

  • Exceptionally quiet due to 'Zero Frozr' technology where fans stop at low loads
  • High energy efficiency with a low 120W TDP, suitable for 400W power supplies
  • Excellent thermal management; typically stays under 65-70°C even when gaming
  • Great performance for 1080p gaming on high or ultra settings
  • Visually appealing design with a white illuminated MSI dragon logo
  • Solid build quality featuring a metal plate to prevent PCB sagging

What customers don't like about MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming

  • Limited 128-bit memory bus can bottle-neck performance in some high-res scenarios
  • 2GB VRAM may be insufficient for ultra textures in newer or 1440p titles
  • Plastic shroud design can feel 'cheap' compared to higher-end metal models
  • Lack of a full backplate on the 2G model compared to competitors
  • Performance isn't a massive leap over the previous generation GTX 760
  • Higher price point compared to some similarly performing AMD alternatives

Verdict

The MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming is a Maxwell-based graphics card featuring 1,024 CUDA cores and options for 2GB or 4GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. It operates with a base clock of 1216 MHz and a boost clock of 1279 MHz in Gaming Mode, supported by a 120W TDP and a single 8-pin power connector. Key advantages include its Twin Frozr V cooling system with Zero Frozr technology for silent operation under low loads, high energy efficiency, and reliable 1080p gaming performance with advanced connectivity including three DisplayPort 1.2 and one HDMI 2.0 port. However, it is constrained by its relatively narrow 112 GB/s memory bandwidth and a lack of a protective backplate on standard models, which can lead to performance bottlenecks at resolutions higher than 1080p.

Compare MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of MSI GeForce GTX 960 Gaming and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found