Can my graphics card handle better games?

[leo1798]

I got my current laptop back in 2016, it's a 17" ASUS Q534UX using some scholarship funds with the following specs:
Intel i7-6500 U @ 2.50 GHz - Turbo to 3.0 GHz

16 GB DDR4 Memory

512 GB M.2 SSD, 2 TB HDD

4K Touch-Screen Display

Nvidia 950M

I get good performance for the games I run to a certain extent since my primary genre is Grand Strategy. I play games such as Hearts of Iron 4, Europa Universalis 4, and Civilization 6 which run smoothly up until the late-game, but this is for just about anyone. I have strayed away from getting any graphically demanding games as I lack confidence in my GPU to be able to keep up, even with the latest drivers. It definitely does not help when I open up Minecraft and only get 50 FPS at normal settings (Fancy, 16 chunk render, etc.) when I've seen most modern cards get well over 100 without a hitch. Is there some other bottleneck with my system? Just curious so I don't waste money on any better games.

 

[Guest DeWat4]

The 950M is not a very powerful card by most standards. It's pretty good for 720p games and some at 1080p. The i7-6500U is a mobile 15W dual core processor, which is really meant for doing basic tasks, like browsing the web. Your internals aren't really meant for gaming.

 

Also-are you running your games at 4K? If you are, try turning down the resolution for better performance.  You can probably play SOME games, but probably at around 720p or even lower. I know the 950M can play PUBG at 720p at very low settings and get around 60 FPS.  If I were you, I wouldn't buy AAA titles that are seriously graphically demanding. Also, before you buy a game, look up benchmarks for that game on a system with a 950M.

[Energycore]

It seems like it may compare to a GTX 750 Ti or a bit below, depending on hom much it throttles in your laptop (for power / temp reasons). So it should be able to do some new games, in lowest settings. Or try doing 720p.

 

A couple games are insanely hard to run like Call of Duty WWII. But most should be playable, at worst you'll have to go 720p low.

[REEEE]

Could be a cpu bottleneck, my last laptop with a 950m gpu had a i5 6700hq was able to push 50-60 fps on witcher 3

[Mira Yurizaki]

Those games likely run smoothly up until the late game because there's a lot more things to calculate and handle. Especially Civ. In the beginning there's like a handful of things the CPU can do. But late in the game, there could be literally thousands of decisions in total.

[TheGlenlivet]

8 minutes ago, leo1798 said:

I got my current laptop back in 2016, it's a 17" ASUS Q534UX using some scholarship funds with the following specs:
Intel i7-6500 U @ 2.50 GHz - Turbo to 3.0 GHz

16 GB DDR4 Memory

512 GB M.2 SSD, 2 TB HDD

4K Touch-Screen Display

Nvidia 950M

I get good performance for the games I run to a certain extent since my primary genre is Grand Strategy. I play games such as Hearts of Iron 4, Europa Universalis 4, and Civilization 6 which run smoothly up until the late-game, but this is for just about anyone. I have strayed away from getting any graphically demanding games as I lack confidence in my GPU to be able to keep up, even with the latest drivers. It definitely does not help when I open up Minecraft and only get 50 FPS at normal settings (Fancy, 16 chunk render, etc.) when I've seen most modern cards get well over 100 without a hitch. Is there some other bottleneck with my system? Just curious so I don't waste money on any better games.

 

No bottleneck other than the cooling system in most laptops.  The 950m wasn't a great card back in 2016 and it's no better today.  The system isn't nearly as powerful as a desk top, so don't think that your 950m is as good as a desktop gtx950.  The power levels for mobile hardware and cooling restrictions are just to low.

[TheSLSAMG]

1 minute ago, Energycore said:

It seems like it may compare to a GTX 750 Ti or a bit below, depending on hom much it throttles in your laptop (for power / temp reasons). So it should be able to do some new games, in lowest settings. Or try doing 720p.

 

A couple games are insanely hard to run like Call of Duty WWII. But most should be playable, at worst you'll have to go 720p low.

Definitely below a 750 Ti. The GTX 960M is a GTX 750 Ti, and at least in Fire Strike. performs over twice as well as the 940M.

[leo1798]

I wouldn't dare try to run anything at 4k, Lol, I play in 1080p. I know that laptop cards are generally lower spec'd but I'm surprised to hear it's lower than a 750 Ti, would it be comprable to an OG 750? I didn't buy it for gaming of course, it's a productivity machine, but it's still nice to enjoy a good game every now and then. Thanks for everyone's input.

[Froody129]

9 hours ago, TheSLSAMG said:

Definitely below a 750 Ti. The GTX 960M is a GTX 750 Ti, and at least in Fire Strike. performs over twice as well as the 940M.

So it’s like a 1030?

[genexis_x]

10 hours ago, DeWat4 said:

The 950M is not a very powerful card by most standards

53 minutes ago, Froody129 said:

So it’s like a 1030?

Similar performance with MX150. Still pretty good for esports titles and modern games (low settings)

[leo1798]

6 hours ago, ZM Fong said:

Similar performance with MX150. Still pretty good for esports titles and modern games (low settings)

It does very well with somewhat-older titles and modern strategy games from my experience, so unless you absolutely must play the latest AAA titles, which it can still handle with modifications, you should never run out of games to play.