Winner
AMD Radeon HD 7970M
GPUBoss recommends the AMD Radeon HD 7970M based on its gaming, benchmarks and compute performance.
See full details Radeon HD 7970M vs GeForce GTX 765M |
Released April, 2012
AMD Radeon HD 7970M
- 850 MHz
- 2 GB GDDR5
7.2 Out of 10
by Joel-Hruska (Mar, 2013)The productivity improvements from a dual display are very real, and while 3x monitors are only a boost if you work with multiple full-screen programs simultaneously, the additional cost is smaller if you’re looking to build a dual-monitor workstation to begin with.
VS
Released May, 2013
Nvidia GeForce GTX 765M
- 797 MHz
- 2 GB GDDR5
6.4 Out of 10
by Slobodan-Simic (May, 2013)The GTX 765M is also based on the 28nm GK106 Kepler GPU but features 768 CUDA cores and works at 850MHz+ GPU clock and comes with 2GB of GDDR5 memory clocked at 4GHz and paired up with a 128-bit memory interface for 64GB/s of memory bandwidth.
GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 7970M vs 765M among Laptop GPUs over 35W TDP
Gaming | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more | |
Graphics | |
| | |
| T-Rex, Manhattan, Sky Diver Factor and Fire Strike Factor | |
Computing | |
| | |
| Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 31 more | |
Value | |
| | |
| Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 31 more | |
Noise and Power | |
| | |
| TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more | |
| 7.2 | Overall Score |
| | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
AMD Radeon HD 7970MGPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much higher dead space 3 framerate | 92.3 fps | vs | 70.1 fps | More than 30% higher dead space 3 framerate | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much better CLBenchmark raytrace score | 175,685 | vs | 55,794 | Around 3.2x better CLBenchmark raytrace score | |||
| Better PassMark score | 3,781 | vs | 1,874 | More than 2x better PassMark score | |||
| Significantly higher memory bandwidth | 153.6 GB/s | vs | 64.1 GB/s | Around 2.5x higher memory bandwidth | |||
| Better 3DMark vantage graphics score | 21,507 | vs | 13,390 | More than 60% better 3DMark vantage graphics score | |||
| Better 3DMark06 score | 22,370.5 | vs | 19,624 | Around 15% better 3DMark06 score | |||
| Better floating-point performance | 2,176 GFLOPS | vs | 1,224.2 GFLOPS | Around 80% better floating-point performance | |||
| Slightly higher clock speed | 850 MHz | vs | 797 MHz | More than 5% higher clock speed | |||
| Higher pixel rate | 27.2 GPixel/s | vs | 12.75 GPixel/s | Around 2.2x higher pixel rate | |||
| Higher effective memory clock speed | 4,800 MHz | vs | 4,008 MHz | Around 20% higher effective memory clock speed | |||
| More render output processors | 32 | vs | 16 | Twice as many render output processors | |||
| Significantly wider memory bus | 256 bit | vs | 128 bit | 2x wider memory bus | |||
| More shading units | 1,280 | vs | 768 | 512 more shading units | |||
| Better face detection score | 51.18 mPixels/s | vs | 8.79 mPixels/s | More than 5.8x better face detection score | |||
| Higher texture rate | 68 GTexel/s | vs | 51 GTexel/s | Around 35% higher texture rate | |||
| Better fire strike factor score | 46.48 | vs | 25.45 | Around 85% better fire strike factor score | |||
| More texture mapping units | 80 | vs | 64 | 16 more texture mapping units | |||
| Higher memory clock speed | 1,200 MHz | vs | 1,002 MHz | Around 20% higher memory clock speed | |||
| Higher BioShock infinite framerate | 43.7 fps | vs | 23.25 fps | Around 90% higher BioShock infinite framerate | |||
| Higher metro: last light framerate | 31 | vs | 18.2 | More than 70% higher metro: last light framerate | |||
| Better PassMark direct compute score | 1,970 | vs | 1,273 | Around 55% better PassMark direct compute score | |||
| Higher crysis 3 framerate | 20.3 fps | vs | 14.2 fps | Around 45% higher crysis 3 framerate | |||
| |||||||
| Significantly better manhattan score | 3,695.75 | vs | 2,350.05 | More than 55% better manhattan score | |||
| Significantly higher diablo III framerate | 111.7 fps | vs | 94.1 fps | Around 20% higher diablo III framerate | |||
| Lower TDP | 75W | vs | 100W | 25% lower TDP | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon HD 7970M vs GeForce GTX 765M
Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench
Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench
T-Rex (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench
Manhattan (GFXBench 3.0) Data courtesy CompuBench
Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark
Thief
Battlefield 4
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| 765M vs 860M | ||
| | VS |  |
| 765M vs 960M | ||
| | VS |  |
| 765M vs 850M | ||
| | VS |  |
| 765M vs 750M | ||
| | VS |  |
| 765M vs 770M | ||
| | VS |  |
| 765M vs 950M | ||
| | VS |  |
| 765M vs 660M | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| RX Vega 64 vs 1080 Ti | ||
 | VS |  |
| 1050 vs 1050 Ti | ||
 | VS | |
| $412 | ||
| 1060 vs 1050 Ti | ||
 | VS | |
| 970 vs 1050 Ti | ||
| | VS | |
| $412 | ||
| 970 vs 1060 | ||
 | VS | |
| 960 vs 1050 Ti | ||
 | VS | |
| 1080 vs 1080 Ti | ||
