0 Comments
| | Radeon R7 265 vs GeForce GTX 750 Ti |
Released February, 2014
AMD Radeon R7 265
- 900 MHz
- 2 GB GDDR5
by techPowerUp!This configuration is good for up to 150 W of power draw.
VS
Released February, 2014
Nvidia GeForce GTX 750 Ti
- 1 GHz
- 2 GB GDDR5
by techPowerUp!We also reviewed cards with custom coolers from board partners today, and their cards improve on these noise levels some more, which makes the GTX 750 Ti an excellent choice if you don't need much gaming performance, but want a very quiet experience.
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with GPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Higher pixel rate | 28.8 GPixel/s | vs | 16.32 GPixel/s | More than 75% higher pixel rate | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| More render output processors | 32 | vs | 16 | Twice as many render output processors | |||
| Wider memory bus | 256 bit | vs | 128 bit | 2x wider memory bus | |||
| More shading units | 1,024 | vs | 640 | 384 more shading units | |||
| More texture mapping units | 64 | vs | 40 | 24 more texture mapping units | |||
| |||||||
| Higher clock speed | 1,020 MHz | vs | 900 MHz | Around 15% higher clock speed | |||
| Significantly higher turbo clock speed | 1,085 MHz | vs | 925 MHz | More than 15% higher turbo clock speed | |||
| Higher texture rate | 82.64 GTexel/s | vs | 57.6 GTexel/s | Around 45% higher texture rate | |||
| Higher memory clock speed | 1,502 MHz | vs | 1,400 MHz | More than 5% higher memory clock speed | |||
Features Key features of the Radeon R7 265 vs GeForce GTX 750 Ti
pixel rate Number of pixels a graphics card can render to the screen every second
Radeon R7 265
28.8 GPixel/s
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
16.32 GPixel/s
Radeon R7 265 | by techPowerUp!While I wouldn't call it an ideal 1080p card, it still has enough performance for decent gaming at that resolution if you don't mind sacrificing some anti-aliasing or detail levels.
texture rate Speed at which a graphics card can perform texture mapping
Radeon R7 265
57.6 GTexel/s
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
82.64 GTexel/s
Radeon R7 265 | by techPowerUp!AMD tells us that they expect the Radeon R7 265 to retail at around $150, which is a very competitive price for the card's performance.
floating point performance How fast the gpu can crunch numbers
Radeon R7 265
1,843 GFLOPS
GeForce GTX 750 Ti
1,728 GFLOPS
shading units Subcomponents of the gpu, these run in parallel to enable fast pixel shading
Radeon R7 265
1,024
texture mapping units Built into each gpu, these resize and rotate bitmaps for texturing scenes
GeForce GTX 750 Ti | by techPowerUp!The GM107 hence features a total of 640 CUDA cores and 48 TMUs.
render output processors GPU commponents responsible for transform pixels as they flow between memory buffers
GeForce GTX 750 Ti | by techPowerUp!At its outermost ring, the GM107 features the GigaThread Engine, a component that marshals data and instructions between the graphics processing cluster (GPC), the raster operations processors (ROPs), the L3 cache, the memory controllers, the bus interface, and the display I/O..
Reviews Word on the street
| Radeon R7 265 | vs | GeForce GTX 750 Ti | ||
| 9.4 | 9.0 | Radeon R7 265 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Specifications Full list of technical specs
gpu | Radeon R7 265 | vs | GeForce GTX 750 Ti |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPU brand | AMD | Nvidia | |
| GPU name | Pitcairn | GM107 | |
| Market | Desktop | Desktop | |
| Clock speed | 900 MHz | 1,020 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 925 MHz | 1,085 MHz | |
| Is dual GPU | No | No | |
| Reference card | None | None | |
raw performance | |||
| Shading units | 1,024 | 640 | |
| Texture mapping units | 64 | 40 | |
| Render output processors | 32 | 16 | |
| Pixel rate | 28.8 GPixel/s | 16.32 GPixel/s | |
| Texture rate | 57.6 GTexel/s | 82.64 GTexel/s | |
| Floating-point performance | 1,843 GFLOPS | 1,728 GFLOPS | |
memory | Radeon R7 265 | vs | GeForce GTX 750 Ti |
|---|---|---|---|
| Memory clock speed | 1,400 MHz | 1,502 MHz | |
| Effective memory clock speed | 5,600 MHz | 5,400 MHz | |
| Memory bus | 256 bit | 128 bit | |
| Memory | 2,048 MB | 2,048 MB | |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
Popular Comparisons
Read more
Comments
Showing 8 comments.
skunimatrix (03:21 PM, October 26, 2014)
LhFan_08 (07:13 AM, September 29, 2014)
Vicente (07:16 PM, August 6, 2014)
alex (05:37 PM, August 6, 2014)
AMD = CHEAPER AND FASTER (08:25 AM, August 1, 2014)
sal (09:48 PM, July 18, 2014)
ATA (12:27 AM, July 18, 2014)
mostafa (12:25 PM, July 4, 2014)





