GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 7970 vs 760

Gaming

Real world tests using the latest 3D games

battlefield 3 (2013) and Civilization 5

Benchmarks

Synthetic tests to measure overall performance

3DMark Vantage Texture Fill

Compute Performance

General computing tests executed on the GPU

SmallLuxGPU 2.0d4

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
AMD Radeon HD 7970 

GPUBoss recommends the AMD Radeon HD 7970  based on its 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

AMD Radeon HD 7970

GPUBoss Winner
Front view of Radeon HD 7970

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Radeon HD 7970

Reasons to consider the
AMD Radeon HD 7970

Report a correction
Better 3DMark vantage texture fill score 107.55 vs 82.8 Around 30% better 3DMark vantage texture fill score
More memory 3,072 MB vs 2,048 MB 50% more memory
Better floating-point performance 3,789 GFLOPS vs 2,258 GFLOPS Around 70% better floating-point performance
Higher memory bandwidth 264 GB/s vs 192.3 GB/s More than 35% higher memory bandwidth
Much better SmallLuxGPU 2.0d4 score 23,600 vs 228 More than 103.5x better SmallLuxGPU 2.0d4 score
More shading units 2,048 vs 1,152 896 more shading units
Higher texture rate 118.4 GTexel/s vs 94.1 GTexel/s More than 25% higher texture rate
Higher pixel rate 29.6 GPixel/s vs 23.5 GPixel/s More than 25% higher pixel rate
More texture mapping units 128 vs 96 32 more texture mapping units
Wider memory bus 384 bit vs 256 bit 50% wider memory bus
Quieter idle noise level 40.2 dB vs 41 dB Almost the same
Slightly higher crysis: warhead framerate 54.7 fps vs 49.8 fps Around 10% higher crysis: warhead framerate
Front view of GeForce GTX 760

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 760

Report a correction
Higher clock speed 980 MHz vs 925 MHz More than 5% higher clock speed
Quieter load noise level 50 dB vs 55.2 dB Around 10% quieter load noise level
More energy-efficient load power consumption 336W vs 391W Around 15% more energy-efficient load power consumption
Higher effective memory clock speed 6,008 MHz vs 5,500 MHz Around 10% higher effective memory clock speed
More energy-efficient idle power consumption 108W vs 113W Around 5% more energy-efficient idle power consumption
Higher memory clock speed 1,502 MHz vs 1,375 MHz Around 10% higher memory clock speed
Lower TDP 170W vs 250W More than 30% lower TDP

Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon HD 7970 vs GeForce GTX 760

3DMark Vantage (Texture Fill) Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX performance

Battlefield 3 (2013) 1920x1080 - Ultra quality + FXAA-HIGH

Radeon HD 7970
100.5 fps
GeForce GTX 760
103.4 fps
The game has been tuned to run well on most computer systems, to let as many players as possible experience the game.
Radeon HD 7970 | by techPowerUp! (Jul, 2012)

Civilization 5 1680x1050 - Maximum quality + 4xMSAA

Radeon HD 7970
81.9 fps
GeForce GTX 760
84.5 fps
After the tremendous success of Far Cry, the German game studio Crytek released their latest shooter Crysis in 2007.
Radeon HD 7970 | by techPowerUp! (Jul, 2012)

BioShock Infinite 1920 x 1080 - Ultra preset + DX11 (DDOF)

Radeon HD 7970
70.4 fps
GeForce GTX 760
68.2 fps

SmallLux GPU 2.0d4 Measures compute performance using OpenCL to do 3D rendering

Reviews Word on the street

Radeon HD 7970  vs GeForce GTX 760 

8.8
9.0
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.
GeForce GTX 760

Comments

Showing 9 comments.
Liers!
I have an ASUS 7970 HD TOP card, along with 12gb ram an SSD, and an olde but very strong i7 975X from back in the day. I run 1920 x 1200 on ultra AAx4 everything maxed out full screen - solid on 55-60fps
6.9??? that is a terrible rating it should be higher then that
Yes, it's an APU, however they're designed for high-frame rate high-resolution on 'high' settings. Just buy a 780, same price a console but you'll be playing most things in ultra at 1080p/1440p.
Next gen consoles do not have dedicated graphic cards nor an amd gpu/apu. They are however using a very powerful apu, and are aimed at about mid settings level graphics capabilities
Battlefield 3 is optimized for Nvidia cards. Battlefield 4 will be optimized for amd cards due to next gen consoles also being on amd cards
Yeah, just like Nezumiiro said, games are usually optimized for one or the other, AMD or Nvidia. What you are going to notice real quick: It will be the exact opposite in Battlefield 4. DICE and Nvidia got together and made BF3 play better on Nvidia cards. Now, DICE and AMD got together and made BF4 better for AMD. From E3 article from this year: "When we shared the first picture of the PC setup that was going to be used, a lot of people thought that it featured two 7990s in Crossfire. Well, that isn’t the case as the PCs that are currently running Battlefield 4 are made of two 7970s in Crossfire and an AMD FX-8350." 2 XFX 7970s and an 8350....All AMD.
Battlefield 3 much prefers Nvidia drivers; it's highly optimised to make the most of Nvidia's features (i.e. PhysX, CUDA). You'll notice these discrepancies across the history of all GPU's, on a game by game basis. However the difference between 70FPS and 100FPS is purely academic, and assuming you were to play BF3 at the same settings it was tested it, you'd not notice any difference. Battlefield 4 will "favour" AMD cards / drivers, and benchmarks should reflect this. So if you are looking to upgrade as a BF player, you'd be safest going AMD.
How does the 7970 beat the 760 in every possible category and thee 760 allegedly get 30 more FPS on Battlefield 3? Is this accurate and how is that possible?
comments powered by Disqus