Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 960
GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 960 based on its benchmarks, compute performance and noise and power.
See full details GeForce GTX 960 vs 680 |
VS
GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 960 vs 680 among Desktop GPUs
Gaming | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more | |
Graphics | |
| | |
| T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more | |
Computing | |
| | |
| Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Value | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more | |
Noise and Power | |
| | |
| TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more | |
| 7.1 | Overall Score |
| | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much better 3DMark 11 graphics score | 32,987 | vs | 9,861 | More than 3.2x 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 | |||
| Higher clock speed | 1,127 MHz | vs | 1,006 MHz | More than 10% higher clock speed | |||
| Significantly higher battlefield 3 framerate | 80 | vs | 65.5 | More than 20% higher battlefield 3 framerate | |||
| Higher memory clock speed | 1,753 MHz | vs | 1,502 MHz | More than 15% higher memory clock speed | |||
| Higher turbo clock speed | 1,178 MHz | vs | 1,058 MHz | More than 10% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Higher BioShock infinite framerate | 75.8 fps | vs | 64.7 fps | More than 15% higher BioShock infinite framerate | |||
| Lower TDP | 120W | vs | 195W | Around 40% lower TDP | |||
| |||||||
| Much better 3DMark06 score | 26,525.5 | vs | 10,767.5 | Around 2.5x better 3DMark06 score | |||
| Significantly higher memory bandwidth | 192.3 GB/s | vs | 112.2 GB/s | More than 70% higher memory bandwidth | |||
| Higher texture rate | 128.8 GTexel/s | vs | 72.1 GTexel/s | Around 80% higher texture rate | |||
| Significantly more texture mapping units | 128 | vs | 64 | Twice as many texture mapping units | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 3,090.4 GFLOPS | vs | 2,308.1 GFLOPS | Around 35% better floating-point performance | |||
| Better video composition score | 72.95 frames/s | vs | 25.99 frames/s | More than 2.8x better video composition score | |||
| More shading units | 1,536 | vs | 1,024 | 512 more shading units | |||
| Wider memory bus | 256 bit | vs | 128 bit | 2x wider memory bus | |||
| Better sky diver factor score | 381.6 | vs | 358.69 | More than 5% better sky diver factor score | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GTX 960 vs 680
Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench
Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench
Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench
Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Cloud Gate Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Thief
Battlefield 4
Reviews Word on the street
Desktops
Looking for a desktop?
- 29 desktops with the GeForce GTX 960, starting from $998
- 1 desktop with the GeForce GTX 680, starting from $2,499
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| 970 vs 960 | ||
 | VS | |
| 1050 Ti vs 960 | ||
 | VS | |
| R9 380 vs 960 | ||
 | VS | |
| 760 vs 960 | ||
 | VS | |
| $274 | ||
| 750 Ti vs 960 | ||
 | VS | |
| 770 vs 960 | ||
 | VS | |
| R9 280X vs 960 | ||
Popular Comparisons
| | VS |  |
| $304 | ||
| 1050 Ti vs 1060 | ||
| | VS | |
| 960 vs 970 | ||
| | VS | |
| $304 | ||
| 1060 vs 970 | ||
| | VS | |
| R9 380 vs 960 | ||
 | VS | |
| R9 390 vs 970 | ||
| | VS | |
| $274 | ||
| 960 vs 750 Ti | ||
| | VS |  |
| 970 vs R9 290X | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 4 comments.
