GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 970 vs 960 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

7.5

Overall Score

Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX 970 

GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 970  based on its benchmarks and compute performance.

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 970

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 970

Report a correction
Significantly higher memory bandwidth 224.4 GB/s vs 112.2 GB/s 2x higher memory bandwidth
Better PassMark score 8,580 vs 5,835 More than 45% better PassMark score
Better 3DMark06 score 15,071 vs 10,767.5 Around 40% better 3DMark06 score
More memory 4,096 MB vs 2,048 MB 2x more memory
Better floating-point performance 3,494 GFLOPS vs 2,308.1 GFLOPS More than 50% better floating-point performance
Higher pixel rate 58.8 GPixel/s vs 36.1 GPixel/s Around 65% higher pixel rate
More render output processors 56 vs 32 24 more render output processors
Higher texture rate 109.2 GTexel/s vs 72.1 GTexel/s More than 50% higher texture rate
Significantly higher BioShock infinite framerate 107.6 fps vs 75.8 fps More than 40% higher BioShock infinite framerate
Better particle simulation score 1,125.25 mInteraction/s vs 710.39 mInteraction/s Around 60% better particle simulation score
More shading units 1,664 vs 1,024 640 more shading units
More texture mapping units 104 vs 64 40 more texture mapping units
Higher crysis 3 framerate 50.6 fps vs 36.1 fps More than 40% higher crysis 3 framerate
Better fire strike factor score 72.16 vs 56.81 More than 25% better fire strike factor score
Higher bioshock infinite framerate 112.8 vs 75.8 Around 50% higher bioshock infinite framerate
Better PassMark direct compute score 4,371 vs 3,017 Around 45% better PassMark direct compute score
Front view of GeForce GTX 960

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 960

Report a correction
Slightly higher clock speed 1,127 MHz vs 1,050 MHz More than 5% higher clock speed
Lower TDP 120W vs 148W Around 20% lower TDP

Benchmarks Real world tests of GeForce GTX 970 vs 960

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

GeForce GTX 970
477.61 mHash/s
GeForce GTX 960
111.95 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

GeForce GTX 970
148.8 mPixels/s
GeForce GTX 960
69.13 mPixels/s

Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

GeForce GTX 970
1,585.08 frames/s
GeForce GTX 960
780.9 frames/s

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Cloud Gate Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Battlefield 4

Reviews Word on the street

GeForce GTX 970  vs 960 

9.7
9.0
Today, we're reviewing the EVGA GeForce GTX 970 SuperClocked ACX, a non-reference design, factory-overclocked GTX 970 graphics card, which comes with a custom-design PCB, and the company's signature ACX cooler, which features an aluminium stack heatsink that uses a trio of copper heat pipes, to draw heat directly from the GPU die, and dissipate it under the airflow of two 80 mm fans.
GeForce GTX 970

Comments

Showing 25 comments.
DirectX 11 support started with the Radeon HD 5000 series cards (and Nvidia's 400 series), so it's meets the recommended requirements of playing DX11 games. Not sure why you think it can't play DX11 games, unless that wasn't your original point. In that case, I need to be less high and you need to be more clear in your writing.
Oh did she? Thats great, a wife I never knew about is blowing ya, cool. So I guess I got married at 1 point? Was it your 1st? Did ya enjoy it? Thats great. Your sorta getting off topic here? The HD5850 was a higher end card from ATI back in the day, were your n210 was never even a mid end card, it was never meant to be. So yeah, its crap for gaming. HD5850 well its old, what did you expect with todays games? Because 2 of them are matching some of the mid end cards of today makes you upset? Well sorry to say but the performance numbers between the series isn't as drastic as it once was. BF3 wasn't all that hard for even a single HD5850 or a GTX460 which is closer to a HD5830 speeds. BF4 wasn't even a huge improvement, the min specs were damn near the same, so why wouldn't a HD5850 run BF4 let alone 2 of them which BF4 is a game the used dual GPU setups really well. I also didn't have MSAA on which is pretty taxing option and all setting on high. Like I said Them 5850's are old and mine are worn out, fans died in them and I got fans zip tired to them in a PC behind me doing folding@home on the GPU side of things. My primary PC has 780ti's, I got them for well, pretty much nothing thanks to my job. Anyway have fun with my wife lol
ummm.... your wife blew me last night, she still works, huh? Just because your crap ass AMD chip, works half ass while on fire, doesn't mean it is good, or deserves applause. my "old" f*cking Geforce n210 from 2007 "can still play "X" stupid kid game as 800 fps," as well.... but it's a crap card from 2004. Your card sucks, brother.... and so does AMD
Intel HD 4000 Series 4 lyfe. Jk, I get like 2 frames a minute in Solitare.
Bruh, stats aren't everything. I've managed to play GTAV on A FUCKING AMD 6520G. Granted I only got 26 fps on medium settings, still. I shouldn't be able to run that shit at all
Huh? Is that an attack towards me or what, I don't what to say about your sentence structure. Anyway half these people never owned a HD5850 let a lone 2 of them. Mine were over clocked with HD5870 bios for added vcore voltage, got the core to 1000+ mhz (can't remember the numbers now) from 775mhz I think the stock was, Got the mem to 1250mhz from 1000mhz which were common overclocked for these cards, they have never gave me issues at them clocks, in fact I know the 1 card can do around 1100mhz on the core, but was unstable in some games, and the 2nd card didn;t like much past 1030mhz, so I kept it around 1020mhz if I remember right. Its been years now. I used the Phenom II x4 940 at 3.8ghz on a DFI 790FX M2RS board then got a Phenom II x6 1100T which I had at 4.2ghz 24/7 on a 990FX ASRock Fatality board and then got the FX 8320 which I had at 4.8ghz with the HD5850's. As for burning up my computer, well Its vary unlikely, and its my money, not yours, and the numbers proved it was worth it, keeping up with the HD 6990 in many game related benchmarks. I ran BF4 on all high with 100% Res scale and of course no MSAA. Anyway, its been so long since I had the cards, I have 1 of them still works like a champ, although I don't use it currently. My other HD5850 I gave to a friend who replaced his HD6770 and then a year later got a gtx 780 and out the 5850 in storage. I went threw fans on my gigabyte model, witch I put a 3 slot Zalman cooler on it, other 1 was a blower style cooler though it was not reference. Also your GTX 970 no offense sucks balls. My 760s could pull more then 60fps in fact over 100 fps in multiplayer servers. and 2 760's = about a GTX 780ti or GTX 970. I think you got something going on with your system or you are running on ultra with res scale more then 100%, the 970 should be running BF4 like nothing.
ok. "hey, old ass 5850's.... your owner is delusional. I guess he's burning his motherboard, doing some crazed overclocking, and barely getting it to run.... the fumes have caused him to think it's at "high" settings." Man..... I bought a $1600 desktop with a i7 5820k and a gtx 970, that doesn't do that. I just do not believe that your sorry chip can do it. I wouldn't have to be rude, but you guys always say this stuff. You buy your cheaper AMD crap, and you just HAVE to believe that it's better than the more popular, simply better, more economically priced (maybe not cheaper, but more for the money) Nvidia cards. They are better, dude. Bf4? isn't that a shooter game that my fucking Geforce 4 can run? Not gtx, not any of that. 2002 GeForce 4. I'm pretty sure it can run that game. I know my 2009 Geforce n210 can.
My 2p: english: i would like to drink some tea. japanese: ocha nomitaides = lit. tea drink-wouldlike both mean the same thing depending on context.. utilising context is more efficient
GTX960 has 2 GB GDDR5, not three. Bad website, very biased towards nvidia.
I agree that it is the most efficient language, but it could use a couple of things from other languages too, for instance an easier and more practical diminutive system. And while those languages often have doublets, they also often carry subtle, but important differences in their meaning. The practical use of English, however, outweighs those advantages.
You are correct. Most other languages are very inefficient compared to English. Try saying common phrases in most other common languages, then say them in English. Some of them have twice as many words to say the same thing.
I disagree, English is actually one of, if not the easiest language to learn. Have you tried German, or a Slavic language? Heck, even Arabic?
Just putting this out there... the English language is the hardest language in the world to learn, but even people who don't know it can still google translate it. Though that person may be trying no one asked for him to speak in English, and even if he was being considerate by doing that since the conversation was in English from the beginning people on here probably know different languages. I may be just assuming this, but I'm guessing that people on this website know basics of probably one language and if they don't. That's why google translate exists. BTW other nations are just as demanding. Not just English people.
The 390 is still better in performance. I don't think the 970 tops it though.
And here I am, responding a year later, and the R9 390 is basically an R9 290 with more RAM and not underclocked. It runs faster than a 970, but GameWorks undoes that advantage and gives the 970 the edge. On top of all that, the R9 300 series has about twice the TDP as the GTX 900 series' direct competitors. I prefer AMD, but this current generation is kind of a mess.
7850 here. I have heavily modded Skyrim with high res packs, ENB, tons of visual improvements, weather mods, and the works, and I still run it with everything on Ultra. That said, I'm still looking at Nvidia for my next card because AMD couldn't be bothered to get the power draw down on their R9 series, and because Nvidia borked so many games with GameWorks.
Oh the irony
in deed. English speaker's arrogance again and again over and over. But no clue of foreign languges themselves - you mentioned that before I chose a GTX 960. Hope its no mistake but dont think so
in deed. English speaker's arrogance.
Wrong https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5osqF_dhCVg And https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nbzGWuhZ66w a 5850 is a bit faster the the Hd7790, get yo facts straight
I also call BS... because I have two 7770's, that I used to have in an old test rig of mine, and THEY barely did the same performance you say YOU achieved with to 5850's. A 750 Ti and a 7770 are both neck and neck, and a 750 Ti can't even run that game at those settings at that amount of FPS. In fact, the 750 Ti actually beats the 7770 in a few tests. 750 Ti >(Most of the time) Radeon 7770 750 Ti < 2x Radeon 7770 2x Radeon 7770's > 2x Radeon 5850's
Since people brought AMD, i have to say this with the hope of helping someone else in the decision i myself had to do: i bought an gtx 960 last September and ended up desiring more power for demanding games like, Shadow of Mordor, Batman Arkham Knight (with latest patches), Dying Light, Metro 2033/LL Redux, etc, playing at 1080 and 960 was doing an amazing job just it goes to the point where your able to taste really nice graphics but cant quite reach the max you want.(I upgraded from an old Qosmio x505 with gtx 460) So i decided to upgrade and had to decide between GtX 970 and R9 390 and went for Sapphire Nitro Version becuse: The performance its pretty similar and price at my time of purchase was only about +$5 from the 970 model i had considered, and for around a %5 better performance at least from what i saw in many videos, plus more than double RAM for "future proof" and definitely more modding headroom. And i gotta say that it works flawless , its overkill for 1080 but definetly those 8Gbs of Vram come in handy when modding games like Skyrim and Fallout4, and applying HighRes textures. AMD its amazing for its price (got mine at newegg Black Friday Sale) just avoid crimsom drivers standar cc works better in general. So with close prices of a sale there little reason to choose Nvidias option because c´mon those Gameworks improvements are not much of a difference and also i plan to upgrade to 4k Monitor in the near future so, because of clear Vram advantage, plus Xfire being much better than sli scaling on this moddels from what i've seen i would say AMD does great. Dont stay with Nvidia for tradition as i used to do. at least if your in this price range the leap of faith it's well worth it.
The 7970 is crap really. Ive owned several of them. Went all the way to the R9 390x and I am now making the decision to switch to Nvidia. The MSI 970 gaming 4g. Friend has one and it surpasses the frame rate and TDP of my ATI 7970, HD6870 and the R9 290x. ATI/AMD is in a slump right now, and with their Crimson drivers and support, its getting worse. AMD is choking out in this GPU market...sad but true.
http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-2716178/dx12-stackable-vram.html
I can run gtx 660- 960 on my stock dell xps 8300 psu and it doesn't over heat... and it fits in the case. from what I've read the AMDs require much more power.. and add heat like someone just said.
comments powered by Disqus