Having owned both, I can say the above comments are right on target.
The 95 is a big, soft shooting tank of a gun. If you have small hands or short fingers, the trigger reach is going to be noticed immediately. It is a long pull in DA and, as Ashlander suggests, could be very welcomed in a HD situation. The SA pull has lots of take up but it breaks pretty cleanly. I never had a single problem, no failures of any kind.
But I did sell it to acquire the SR9c. Frankly, I couldn't be happier with this pistol. Is does have a heavy spring which does reduce the felt recoil but does make racking the slide a little more difficult. Mostly, I love the trigger. It's the same with every shot, no slack to take up and it breaks clean as glass. For me I am marginally more accurate with the SR9c but not enough to claim it as a quantum leap. With the 10 round mag, it makes a fine CC pistol. With the 17 round mag and grip sleeve, it is as comfortable to hold and shoot as any full size pistol. It too has been 100% reliable with any ammo I've fed it. I like the comfort level of the external safety and I find the loaded chamber indicator, which some just hate, to be a non issue and largely ignored.
I honestly don't think you can go wrong with either the P95 or the SR9c. If you prefer hammer fired over striker fired, big and reliable, go with the 95. And you'll save about $100. I think the new gun price is around $325 or so. You might find a used one for considerably less.
Personally, I like the SR9c. Fits my hand beautifully, great ergonomics, does everything the 95 does but small enough to conceal comfortably. For me, the 95 was a great pistol to learn with. But the 9c is a keeper for the long term.
Good luck with your choice. I don't think you can go wrong either way.