GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 760 vs 470

Gaming

Real world tests using the latest 3D games

Civilization 5

Benchmarks

Synthetic tests to measure overall performance

PassMark, 3DMark Vantage Texture Fill, 3DMark 11 Graphics and 2 more

Compute Performance

General computing tests executed on the GPU

SmallLuxGPU 2.0d4, PassMark Direct Compute and CLBenchmark Raytrace

Noise and Power

How loud and hot does the card run idle and under load

TDP, Idle Noise Level, Load Noise Level, Idle Power Consumption and 1 more

GPUBoss Score

Gaming, Benchmarks, Compute Performance and Noise and Power

Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 

GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 760  based on its gaming, benchmarks and noise and power.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of GeForce GTX 760

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 760

Report a correction
Significantly better 3DMark vantage graphics score 30,030 vs 15,350 More than 95% better 3DMark vantage graphics score
Better 3DMark vantage texture fill score 82.8 vs 31.5 Around 2.8x better 3DMark vantage texture fill score
Higher clock speed 823 MHz vs 700 MHz Around 20% higher clock speed
Significantly higher effective memory clock speed 5,600 MHz vs 3,348 MHz More than 65% higher effective memory clock speed
Much more energy-efficient idle power consumption 108W vs 135W 20% more energy-efficient idle power consumption
Better PassMark score 4,951 vs 3,585 Around 40% better PassMark score
Higher memory bandwidth 192.3 GB/s vs 133.9 GB/s Around 45% higher memory bandwidth
Better 3DMark 11 graphics score 8,730 vs 4,342 More than 2x better 3DMark 11 graphics score
Better 3DMark06 score 24,480 vs 22,622 Around 10% better 3DMark06 score
Higher texture rate 79 GTexel/s vs 39.2 GTexel/s More than 2x higher texture rate
More energy-efficient load power consumption 336W vs 385W Around 15% more energy-efficient load power consumption
Significantly higher BioShock infinite framerate 68.2 fps vs 32.8 fps More than 2x higher BioShock infinite framerate
Significantly higher memory clock speed 1,400 MHz vs 837 MHz More than 65% higher memory clock speed
Slightly better floating-point performance 1,896 GFLOPS vs 1,254 GFLOPS More than 50% better floating-point performance
Significantly higher battlefield 3 framerate 103.4 fps vs 45.8 fps More than 2.2x higher battlefield 3 framerate
More shading units 1,152 vs 448 704 more shading units
Quieter load noise level 50 dB vs 53.1 dB More than 5% quieter load noise level
Higher crysis: warhead framerate 49.8 fps vs 27.5 fps More than 80% higher crysis: warhead framerate
More texture mapping units 96 vs 56 40 more texture mapping units
Better PassMark direct compute score 2,338 vs 1,319 More than 75% better PassMark direct compute score
Higher civilization 5 framerate 84.5 fps vs 69.9 fps More than 20% higher civilization 5 framerate
Lower TDP 130W vs 215W Around 40% lower TDP
Front view of GeForce GTX 470

Reasons to consider the
GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 470

Report a correction
Significantly better manhattan score 3,711.56 vs 3,115.84 Around 20% better manhattan score
More render output processors 40 vs 24 16 more render output processors
Better SmallLuxGPU 2.0d4 score 8,300 vs 228 Around 36.5x better SmallLuxGPU 2.0d4 score

Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GTX 760 vs 470

PassMark Industry standard benchmark for overall graphics card performanceData courtesy Passmark

3DMark Vantage (Texture Fill) Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX performance

3DMark 11 Graphics Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 11 GPU performance

CompuBench 1.5 (Bitcoin mining)

GeForce GTX 760
74.06 mHash/s
GeForce GTX 470
97.35 mHash/s

GFXBench 3.0 (T-Rex)

GeForce GTX 760
3,360.04
GeForce GTX 470
3,352.38

GFXBench 3.0 (Manhattan)

GeForce GTX 760
3,115.84
GeForce GTX 470
3,711.56

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus