Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 based on its .
See full details GeForce GTX 770 vs 760 |
Released May, 2013
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770
- 1 GHz
- 2 GB GDDR5
8.3 Out of 10
by techPowerUp!While the Lightning comes with very high clocks out of the box, the TF Gaming is only mildly overclocked by 13 MHz (~1).
VS
Released June, 2013
Nvidia GeForce GTX 760
- 980 MHz
- 2 GB GDDR5
7.7 Out of 10
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.
GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 770 vs 760
Gaming | |
Real world tests using the latest 3D games | |
| crysis: warhead (2013), battlefield 3 (2013) and Far Cry 3 | |
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 | |
| Civilization 5 Texture Decomposition (2013), Passmark Direct Compute and 1 more | |
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 |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770GPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Better passmark score | 6,204 | vs | 4,996 | Around 25% better passmark score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Better 3DMark vantage texture fill score | 109.5 | vs | 82.8 | More than 30% better 3DMark vantage texture fill score | |||
| Higher clock speed | 1,046 MHz | vs | 980 MHz | More than 5% higher clock speed | |||
| Better 3DMark vantage graphics score | 36,150 | vs | 30,030 | More than 20% better 3DMark vantage graphics score | |||
| Better 3DMark06 score | 29,690 | vs | 24,480 | More than 20% better 3DMark06 score | |||
| Significantly more energy-efficient load power consumption | 246W | vs | 336W | More than 25% more energy-efficient load power consumption | |||
| Better 3DMark 11 graphics score | 11,310 | vs | 8,730 | Around 30% better 3DMark 11 graphics score | |||
| Higher effective memory clock speed | 7,012 MHz | vs | 6,008 MHz | More than 15% higher effective memory clock speed | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 3,213 GFLOPS | vs | 2,258 GFLOPS | More than 40% better floating-point performance | |||
| Higher texture rate | 134 GTexel/s | vs | 94.1 GTexel/s | More than 40% higher texture rate | |||
| Higher pixel rate | 33.5 GPixel/s | vs | 23.5 GPixel/s | Around 45% higher pixel rate | |||
| Significantly quieter idle noise level | 38.2 dB | vs | 41 dB | More than 5% quieter idle noise level | |||
| Slightly higher memory bandwidth | 224 GB/s | vs | 192.3 GB/s | More than 15% higher memory bandwidth | |||
| Quieter load noise level | 46.7 dB | vs | 50 dB | More than 5% quieter load noise level | |||
| Better civilization 5 texture decomposition (2013) score | 395 | vs | 333.8 | Around 20% better civilization 5 texture decomposition (2013) score | |||
| Higher turbo clock speed | 1,085 MHz | vs | 1,032 MHz | More than 5% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| More texture mapping units | 128 | vs | 96 | 32 more texture mapping units | |||
| More shading units | 1,536 | vs | 1,152 | 384 more shading units | |||
| Higher memory clock speed | 1,753 MHz | vs | 1,502 MHz | More than 15% higher memory clock speed | |||
| Higher BioShock infinite framerate | 83.4 fps | vs | 68.2 fps | More than 20% higher BioShock infinite framerate | |||
| Higher far cry 3 framerate | 50.4 fps | vs | 41.5 fps | More than 20% higher far cry 3 framerate | |||
| Higher battlefield 3 framerate | 126.2 fps | vs | 103.4 fps | More than 20% higher battlefield 3 framerate | |||
| Better passmark direct compute score | 3,123 | vs | 2,396 | More than 30% better passmark direct compute score | |||
| Better CLBenchmark raytrace score | 164,636 | vs | 130,616 | More than 25% better CLBenchmark raytrace score | |||
| Higher crysis: warhead framerate | 57 fps | vs | 49.8 fps | Around 15% higher crysis: warhead framerate | |||
| More SMX units | 8 | vs | 6 | 2 more SMX units | |||
| |||||||
| Lower TDP | 170W | vs | 230W | More than 25% lower TDP | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GTX 770 vs 760
Passmark Industry standard benchmark for overall graphics card performance
3DMark Vantage (Texture Fill) Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX performance
3DMark 11 Graphics Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 11 GPU performance
Crysis: Warhead (2013) 1920x1080 - Enthusiast Quality + 4xAA
GeForce GTX 760 | by techPowerUp!Set decades after the events of Crysis 2, you wake up from a stasis pod to find long lost friend and squadmate "Psycho" who explains how C.E.L.L has virtually taken over the world by monopolizing energy production in Crysis 3.
Far Cry 3 1920 x 1080 - Ultra Quality + 4x MSAA + Enh. AtoC
GeForce GTX 770 | by techPowerUp!The game is a typical linear first-person shooter, but offers a talent tree, fast paced action and one-on-one duels with special game mechanics.
BioShock Infinite 1920 x 1080 - Ultra preset + DX11 (DDOF)
Reviews Word on the street
| GeForce GTX 770 | vs | 760 | ||
 | GeForce GTX 770 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
Popular Comparisons
Read more
Comments
Showing 7 comments.
