GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R9 270X vs 960 among Desktop GPUs


Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more


T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more


Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more


Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Noise and Power

TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more


Overall Score

Nvidia GeForce GTX 960 

GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 960  based on its benchmarks, compute performance and noise and power.

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!

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Radeon R9 270X

Reasons to consider the
Sapphire Radeon R9 270X

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark06 score 23,610 vs 10,767.5 Around 2.2x better 3DMark06 score
Significantly higher memory bandwidth 192 GB/s vs 112.2 GB/s More than 70% higher memory bandwidth
Better floating-point performance 2,944 GFLOPS vs 2,308.1 GFLOPS Around 30% better floating-point performance
Significantly better video composition score 80.7 frames/s vs 25.99 frames/s More than 3x better video composition score
Higher texture rate 92 GTexel/s vs 72.1 GTexel/s Around 30% higher texture rate
Wider memory bus 256 bit vs 128 bit 2x wider memory bus
More shading units 1,280 vs 1,024 256 more shading units
More texture mapping units 80 vs 64 16 more texture mapping units
Front view of GeForce GTX 960

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 960

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark 11 graphics score 32,987 vs 8,520 More than 3.8x better 3DMark 11 graphics score
Better PassMark score 5,813 vs 4,658 Around 25% better PassMark score
Higher effective memory clock speed 7,012 MHz vs 6,000 MHz More than 15% higher effective memory clock speed
Better 3DMark vantage graphics score 32,171 vs 28,000 Around 15% better 3DMark vantage graphics score
Significantly higher battlefield 3 framerate 80 vs 65 Around 25% higher battlefield 3 framerate
Significantly better PassMark direct compute score 3,046 vs 1,062 More than 2.8x better PassMark direct compute score
Higher crysis 3 framerate 36.1 fps vs 24.5 fps More than 45% higher crysis 3 framerate
Higher BioShock infinite framerate 75.8 fps vs 55.1 fps Around 40% higher BioShock infinite framerate
Higher memory clock speed 1,753 MHz vs 1,500 MHz More than 15% higher memory clock speed
Lower TDP 120W vs 180W Around 35% lower TDP

Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon R9 270X vs GeForce GTX 960

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 270X
251.26 mHash/s
GeForce GTX 960
111.95 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 270X
57.24 mPixels/s
GeForce GTX 960
69.13 mPixels/s

Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 270X
1,298.8 frames/s
GeForce GTX 960
780.9 frames/s

Particle simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 270X
340.91 mInteraction/s
GeForce GTX 960
710.39 mInteraction/s

Fire Strike Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Sky Diver Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Cloud Gate Factor Data courtesy FutureMark

Battlefield 3

Reviews Word on the street


Showing 25 comments.
I have both graphics cards and for gaming the R9 270x is better. The gaming performance is superior. In battlefield 4 on the siege of shanghai map it is better because it has fewer FPS drops. In nier automata it is the same since with the R9 270x you can play at 60fps stable. But the GTX 960 in battlefield 4 in siege of shanghai has many FPS drops, it has even fallen to 25fps and that in the R9 270x never happens even setting the game to ultra. In nier automata setting the game at low mostly stays between 40 and 50fps but can lower even more. The same goes for wolfenstein 2 and many other games that perform much better with the R9 270x. It's funny because the R9 270x is older but it performs better than the GTX 960. I am disappointed with nvidia
This is B*LLSH*T! I bought the GTX 960 and played TOMB RAIDER on ULTIMATE settings. My Min FPS was as low as 12fps with an average of barely making it to 25fps when i bench marked it. I bought the R9-270x later on and my Fps average was well above 50. This is a sh*t review
No. AMD has better APUs than Intel, and (until Pascal, waiting to see what Polaris brings to the table) AMD also generally has better performance/$ over NVIDIA.
And who in their right mind uses their PC at full power for 6 hours a day 7 days a week? I use mine about 6 hours a week at sub-full power.
RIP 100*C before OC.
Hmmm... I have a Windforce 270X 4GB and only have to turn down the settings on some newer games. I can play most 2014 titles at 4Kp60 on high and 2016 titles on high in 1080p60.
Which model? I have the 4GB Windforce, and have had no problems. I only BSoDed once in 2 years and it was due to Adobe software. Great performance (PAYDAY 2 recording/streaming) 4Kp60 high with minimal stuttering.
lol Hots runs max on my gtx 960 (PNY the cheapest brand)
I don't get those people defending the 270x.. Most of my games I need to run at low / very low graphics, including Heroes of the Storm (still with fps drops)
Nvidia is best. UNIVERSAL TRUTH: AMD will always lose to Nvidia and intel.
XD 480
Try Amazon. Can get an MSI Gaming G2 960 for $181. All the 2GB versions are $200 or less. The 4gb versions are only a few tens more. All are generally similar or less in price to the r9 270x versions. Or at least were. Prices change constantly.
960 cheaper? give link asap
that is a huge misconception you got there ..
I guess you didn't own any Fermi then .. :P
AMD CPU + nVidia GPU is not a pretty good match :v go for the R9
no :3 it is obvious that obsolete products, which means anything older than the hd 4k series should no longer be supported. nvidia does the same with anything older than 8xxx. software team is crap? ... nah. haven't had a single issue with the drivers.
Aunque la comparativa es con las versiones de 2gb yo quiero hacer hincapié en las de 4gb ya que hoy en día si quieres comprar una tarjeta grafica y que te dure al menos unos pocos años sin tener que bajar demasiado los graficos, yo apostaría directamente por las de 4gb de gama media o de 3gb gama media/alta. R9 280 384bits 3gb: 205€, vs R9 270x 256bits 4gb 219€ R9 270x 256bits 4gb 219€, vs GTX 960 128bits 4gb 221€ La GTX solo gana en los test y las pruebas con unos pocos fps mejores pero AMD rinde igual casi inapreciable por menos dinero..... El consumo es muy parejo, apenas vas a notar 40 o 60w de diferencia en la factura de la luz....Sin duda gana la .......R9 280........ a noser que seas un gran fan de nvidia y no te importe el precio y vosotros que opinais? que tarjeta de nvidia meteríais para comparar la R9 280??
The US Average is $0.12kwh. Aussies and other countries can be $0.30kwh So yes, it can add up, especially when you consider the 960 is cheaper than the 270x and performs better too, so you save Now AND later. This general trend continues, with the 970 > 290x, better performance, cheaper retail and it uses half the energy.
I have had both Nvidia and ATI cards, the Nvidia ones are more stable and have had a much longer life. My Ati cards have all died within 3 years. Higher heat will cause that.
For people saying the energy savings is "a couple bucks over years" learn math please. It is 60 watts difference. At 6 hours a day that is .36 kwatts = 7 cents a day at 20 cents a kw/hour. That is 20-25 bucks a year! It can easily be 100 bucks over the life of the card.
For people saying the energy savings is "a couple bucks over years" learn math please. It is 60 watts difference. At 6 hours a day that is .36 kwatts = 7 cents a day at 20 cents a kw/hour. That is 20-25 bucks a year! It can easily be 100 bucks over the life of the card.
I Have the R9 270x and my friend has the 970 mine runs a bit better. But any way both cards are still good
Yes it i is better ONLY in Crysis3 and who even play crysis
You play ultra my ass...
comments powered by Disqus