Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 760
GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 760 based on its .
See full details| | GeForce GTX 760 vs 480 |
by techPowerUp!Palit has overclocked both GPU and memory on their GTX 760 JetStream out of the box, which provides a nice 6% performance improvement over the reference design.
by techPowerUp! (Mar, 2010)Please also note that this cooler uses a direct touch heatpipe design that we have first seen on CPU coolers.
Gaming | |
Real world tests using the latest 3D games | |
| GeForce GTX 760 N/A GeForce GTX 480 N/A | |
| crysis: warhead (2013), Crysis: Warhead (2012), Batman: Arkham City and 6 more | |
Benchmarks | |
Synthetic tests to measure overall performance | |
| GeForce GTX 760 7.6 GeForce GTX 480 7.1 | |
| Passmark, 3DMark 11 Graphics, 3DMark Vantage Graphics and 3DMark06 | |
Compute Performance | |
General computing tests executed on the GPU | |
| GeForce GTX 760 6.9 GeForce GTX 480 6.7 | |
| Passmark Direct Compute and CLBenchmark Raytrace | |
Noise and Power | |
How loud and hot does the card run idle and under load | |
| GeForce GTX 760 8.2 GeForce GTX 480 7.5 | |
| TDP, Idle Noise Level, Load Noise Level, Idle Power Consumption and 1 more | |
GPUBoss Score | |
Gaming, Benchmarks, Compute Performance and Noise and Power | |
| GeForce GTX 760 7.3 GeForce GTX 480 6.9 | |
Winner |
Nvidia GeForce GTX 760GPUBoss Winner | | |
| |||||||
| Much higher clock speed | 980 MHz | vs | 726 MHz | Around 35% higher clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much more energy-efficient idle power consumption | 108W | vs | 190W | Around 45% more energy-efficient idle power consumption | |||
| Significantly higher effective memory clock speed | 6,008 MHz | vs | 3,800 MHz | Around 60% higher effective memory clock speed | |||
| Better 3DMark vantage graphics score | 30,030 | vs | 20,100 | Around 50% better 3DMark vantage graphics score | |||
| Much quieter load noise level | 50 dB | vs | 64.1 dB | More than 20% quieter load noise level | |||
| Better 3DMark 11 graphics score | 8,730 | vs | 5,014 | Around 75% better 3DMark 11 graphics score | |||
| More energy-efficient load power consumption | 336W | vs | 421W | More than 20% more energy-efficient load power consumption | |||
| Higher texture rate | 94.1 GTexel/s | vs | 43.6 GTexel/s | Around 2.2x higher texture rate | |||
| Slightly better passmark score | 4,981 | vs | 4,346 | Around 15% better passmark score | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 2,258 GFLOPS | vs | 1,393 GFLOPS | More than 60% better floating-point performance | |||
| Significantly quieter idle noise level | 41 dB | vs | 44 dB | More than 5% quieter idle noise level | |||
| More memory | 2,048 MB | vs | 1,536 MB | Around 35% more memory | |||
| Significantly higher memory clock speed | 1,502 MHz | vs | 950 MHz | Around 60% higher memory clock speed | |||
| More shading units | 1,152 | vs | 480 | 672 more shading units | |||
| More texture mapping units | 96 | vs | 60 | 36 more texture mapping units | |||
| Better passmark direct compute score | 2,334 | vs | 1,604 | More than 45% better passmark direct compute score | |||
| Lower TDP | 170W | vs | 250W | More than 30% lower TDP | |||
| |||||||
| More render output processors | 48 | vs | 32 | 16 more render output processors | |||
| Wider memory bus | 384 bit | vs | 256 bit | 50% wider memory bus | |||
| GeForce GTX 760 | vs | 480 | ||
| 9.0 | 8.4 | GeForce GTX 760 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| VS | |
| R9 270X vs 760 | ||
| VS | |
| 750 Ti vs 760 | ||
| VS | |
| R9 280 vs 760 | ||
| VS | |
| R9 280X vs 760 | ||
| VS | |
| 970 vs 760 | ||
| VS | |
| 770 vs 760 | ||
| VS | |
| 660 vs 760 | ||
| VS | |
| 970 vs 780 | ||
| VS | |
| 980 vs 780 Ti | ||
| VS | |
| 970 vs 770 | ||
| VS | |
| 970 vs 780 Ti | ||
| VS | |
| 980M vs R9 M295X | ||
| VS | |
| R9 270X vs 760 | ||
| VS | |
| 970 vs R9 290X | ||