Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti
GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti based on its .
See full details| | GeForce GTX 780 Ti vs 780 |
by techPowerUp!Thankfully for us, PC gamers, and the readers of this review at large, double-precision floating point performance is completely irrelevant.
by techPowerUp!Idle power consumption of the GTX 780 Lightning is pretty much the same as the reference design, which is good.
Gaming | |
Real world tests using the latest 3D games | |
| GeForce GTX 780 N/A | |
| crysis: warhead (2013), Crysis: Warhead (2012), Batman: Arkham City and 6 more | |
Benchmarks | |
Synthetic tests to measure overall performance | |
| GeForce GTX 780 8.9 | |
| Passmark, 3DMark Vantage Texture Fill, 3DMark 11 Graphics and 2 more | |
Compute Performance | |
General computing tests executed on the GPU | |
| GeForce GTX 780 8.7 | |
| Civilization 5 Texture Decomposition (2013) and Passmark Direct Compute | |
Noise and Power | |
How loud and hot does the card run idle and under load | |
| GeForce GTX 780 9.0 | |
| 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 780 8.8 | |
Winner |
Nvidia GeForce GTX 780 TiGPUBoss Winner | | |
| |||||||
| Better 3DMark vantage texture fill score | 173.1 | vs | 147 | Around 20% better 3DMark vantage texture fill score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Better passmark score | 9,014 | vs | 8,054 | More than 10% better passmark score | |||
| Higher effective memory clock speed | 7,000 MHz | vs | 6,008 MHz | More than 15% higher effective memory clock speed | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 5,040 GFLOPS | vs | 3,977 GFLOPS | More than 25% better floating-point performance | |||
| Higher texture rate | 210 GTexel/s | vs | 166.4 GTexel/s | More than 25% higher texture rate | |||
| Better 3DMark vantage graphics score | 46,186 | vs | 42,870 | Around 10% better 3DMark vantage graphics score | |||
| Higher memory bandwidth | 336 GB/s | vs | 288.4 GB/s | More than 15% higher memory bandwidth | |||
| Higher turbo clock speed | 1,020 MHz | vs | 902 MHz | Around 15% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Higher pixel rate | 52.5 GPixel/s | vs | 41.4 GPixel/s | More than 25% higher pixel rate | |||
| More texture mapping units | 240 | vs | 192 | 48 more texture mapping units | |||
| More shading units | 2,880 | vs | 2,304 | 576 more shading units | |||
| Higher BioShock infinite framerate | 116.4 fps | vs | 95.3 fps | More than 20% higher BioShock infinite framerate | |||
| Higher memory clock speed | 1,752 MHz | vs | 1,502 MHz | More than 15% higher memory clock speed | |||
| Better civilization 5 texture decomposition (2013) score | 396 | vs | 365.9 | Around 10% better civilization 5 texture decomposition (2013) score | |||
| Better passmark direct compute score | 4,653 | vs | 3,992 | More than 15% better passmark direct compute score | |||
| More SMX units | 15 | vs | 13 | 2 more SMX units | |||
| |||||||
| Much better 3DMark06 score | 35,080 | vs | 15,619 | Around 2.2x better 3DMark06 score | |||
| Significantly more energy-efficient load power consumption | 250W | vs | 372W | Around 35% more energy-efficient load power consumption | |||
| More energy-efficient idle power consumption | 62W | vs | 80W | Around 25% more energy-efficient idle power consumption | |||
| Quieter load noise level | 48.1 dB | vs | 51.7 dB | More than 5% quieter load noise level | |||
| Quieter idle noise level | 38 dB | vs | 38.6 dB | Almost the same | |||
| GeForce GTX 780 Ti | vs | 780 | ||
| 9.4 | 9.3 | GeForce GTX 780 Ti | |
|---|---|---|---|---|