GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R9 280X vs 770


Real world tests using the latest 3D games

battlefield 3 (2013)


Synthetic tests to measure overall performance

3DMark 11 Graphics, 3DMark Vantage Graphics and 3DMark06

Compute Performance

General computing tests executed on the GPU

Civilization 5 Texture Decomposition (2013)

Noise and Power

How loud and hot does the card run idle and under load


GPUBoss Score

Gaming, Benchmarks, Compute Performance and Noise and Power

Nvidia GeForce GTX 770 

GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX 770  based on its gaming 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!

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Radeon R9 280X

Reasons to consider the
Generic Radeon R9 280X

Report a correction
More memory 3,072 MB vs 2,048 MB 50% more memory
More shading units 2,048 vs 1,536 512 more shading units
Wider memory bus 384 bit vs 256 bit 50% wider memory bus
Front view of GeForce GTX 770

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX 770

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 1,046 MHz vs 850 MHz Around 25% higher clock speed
Higher effective memory clock speed 7,012 MHz vs 6,000 MHz More than 15% higher effective memory clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 1,085 MHz vs 1,000 MHz Around 10% higher turbo clock speed
Significantly better civilization 5 texture decomposition (2013) score 395 vs 339.1 More than 15% better civilization 5 texture decomposition (2013) score
Slightly higher pixel rate 33.5 GPixel/s vs 27.2 GPixel/s Around 25% higher pixel rate
Higher memory clock speed 1,753 MHz vs 1,500 MHz More than 15% higher memory clock speed
Higher battlefield 3 framerate 126.2 fps vs 106.5 fps Around 20% higher battlefield 3 framerate
Higher BioShock infinite framerate 83.4 fps vs 73.9 fps Around 15% higher BioShock infinite framerate

Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon R9 280X vs GeForce GTX 770

3DMark 11 Graphics Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 11 GPU performance

3DMark Vantage Graphics Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 10 GPU performance

3DMark06 Industry standard benchmark that tests DirectX 9 GPU performance

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

Radeon R9 280X
106.5 fps
GeForce GTX 770
126.2 fps

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

Radeon R9 280X
73.9 fps
GeForce GTX 770
83.4 fps

Civilization 5 Texture Decomp (2013) Using the newest graphics cards Civ V can speed screen transitions by reducing texture sizes

Reviews Word on the street

Radeon R9 280X  vs GeForce GTX 770 

The GTX 770 WindForce OC is no different, but the improvement over the reference design cooler is, nevertheless, not that big because NVIDIA's cooler is already quite good.
GeForce GTX 770


Showing 25 comments.
I live all the benchmarks. They are just window dressing. Under real world use the story changes. I have both of these cards. The gtx-770 is clunky And the radeon is buttery smooth.
Yes, AMD doesn't support CUDA. I also checked it out on my card via GPU-Z. :)
"Noob" ;)
Well amazon also made a $300 card into $600.....
On their Individual Assessments The GTX 770 scores an 8.2 : and The R9 280x scores an 8.5 : But apparently when they compare against each other, the Nvidial cards, "Magically" comes out on top. Loads of Horse Shit, I tell ya!!!
Communist system we are under ? Joke? you know what comunism means no ?
AMD tiene la mejor relacion precio/producto/rendimiento. y te vende lo que verdaderamente vas a necesitar a mitad de precio que nvidia, en cambio. Nvidia te vende productos compatibles con plataformas solo creadas para que te compres y te gastes dinero en una nvidia, que a su vez no hay que quitarle el merito de que consume menos. Es la misma comparativa que si la realizamos entre AMD e Intel. AMD sale ganando siempre. Apenas vas a notar el gasto del consumo por el rendimiento que te pueda ofrecer el ultimo i7. Bueno y ahora con las meomrias ddr4 que casualidad que primero lo sacan para los intel.......
"Thirdly in real world tests the r9 280 (not the 280x) is a much better deal for money"
Yes, I just saw that now. My bad. Spec Nazis are damn helpful.
Reading fail. He has speccing 8Gb (it says 4gb x2).
mine i5 3570k does support it.. who told you that?
I gotta say I agree with the majority of visitors who think this site is biased toward the green team. 770 and 280x is close it's true but why does AMD lose every time? As far as troubles are concerned, I have had more hassle with nVidia cards personaly and would encourage people to buy Radeon. Yes they have their problems but both do. Anyways, check out reviews on the net and decide what you want, remember though that the samples reviewers recieve aren't guarenteed to be the same as the one you purchase. My 280x is a Sapphire Dual X and performs brilliantly at 1080p on MAX on all my games (Titanfall, COD Ghosts..). Happy gaming and don't be a fanboy, it's just annoying.
I'm gonna try to give the most fair comparison here. I own both cards. So R9 280x if we talk FPS stats compared to the Nvidia 770 there is 1-8 frame difference in AMD's Favor, but who cares 90% of the time we are arguing two frames you cannot see this difference in game .... although I will say this if you think that AMD has bad recording stop it right now..... Gaming evolved from AMD has gone a long way and recording is pretty good..( Although these recording things are in beta) so you can come across problems... So nvidia in this aspect is more secure..... One thing is the R9 280x does indeed artifact but it is so minuscule and so easy to fix just alt tab and go back into game it will refresh card. Also don't listen to people waste your time about CUDA, PHYSX..... PHYSX is possible on AMD proccessors only thing is.. set it up is a pain! I think the bottom line is go for what is cheaper.... which most of the time is AMD but keep in mind .......... If you want to have a plug and play type of GPU because you dont have patience, go for Nvidia... they usually don't have problems and their is very little to tweak
They go purely by system specs, which are higher for Nvidia. The system doesn't account for card architecture, if you're looking for absolute comparisons look at fucking benchmarks.
all things being equal (build quality, heat tolerance, general performance) I may go with nVidia because of their "Cuda Cores"... though I do like AMD for their OpenCL performance. It would be nice to get say a 780 or a 290 that draws less than 225W.
OpenCL is getting more popular - they should have more benchmarks on OpenCL for AMD and nVidia. They should also mention the programs and systems that support OpenCL. Apple seems to be pushing OpenCL and has some nice FirePro options on the new Mac "mini" Pro (cylinder). Also, those systems only use sa 450W PSU - money!
I'd actually rather get a R9 280 or 280x under clocked - a bit - to reduce its power draw ... or maybe the 270x (but then I can uplock a 280x, later, if I want). so few comments talk about the idle power draw (watts) or peak power draw ...
I dont think AMD supports CUDA either - because that is nVidia's thing ... though AMD is stupposed to be BOSS in OpenCL, which is looking fairly nice. I have seen issues with all types/brands of video card - from the card pulling too much power for the computer's PSU to the ATI/AMD Radeon X1900 killing itself with heat, after about 9 months - once the winter chill was gone ... (even in a good box) and getting that RMA'd (no issues there) but then having the replacement fail after about 5 months (if you remember WoW, BC). Figures rarely lie, yet liars often figure .... which is why it is annoying when the manufacturer or vendor hides certain facts to promote their product at the expense of their "customer" - who probably wont stay their customer for long... it is just very bad business and an unfortunate side effect of the communist system we are under ... or should I say the dictatorship of the corporation?
I think for an nVidia card the 770 is good price, performance and power (wattage - only 230W max continuous), though I do like some of the AMD cards as well ... the 780 is a bit faster but IIRC some pull over 250W (Ti?) but if your machine can handle the draw - go for it!
Sometimes the biggest issue isnt even the card itself - or the drivers - it could well be the power draw, stress on the power supply (PSU) and of course cooling - even with the dual slot PCIe video cards - they still pull over 200W - that can stress out (or kill) most systems, over time (or even quicker). This can be a bigger issue if you have a RAID card or even other video cards in your computer (pulling 50W to over 100W each - and generating a fair bit of heat). As always, the devil is in the details. Sometimes it is better to get a pre-built system though - other times you may not get all you think you are getting... (like they often give you weak < 500W PSUs ... or slow/buggy on board RAID controllers, etc.
i said r9 280x not r9 280 moron
Let's see the two of them run BF4, with the 280X using Mantle ;) ;) ;) - R9 280 $219.99 & FREE Shipping (easily overclocked to the speed of the "x" model) - $339.99 & FREE Shipping GTX 770 Sooooo 120$ difference...for that money you can get decent Z97 mobo. PS: I just linked Gigabyte models coz it pooped up 1st,difference in price is in the 100+$ range when comparing other major manufacturers like Asus and MSI.
wake up ryan...on amazon r9 280x and gtx 770s cost the same amount of $$$ (301$)
on amazon ATM you can get gtx 770 now for the same price as r9 280x (301$)so ill go with the nvidia plus it has a cosiderable higher compute performance!
comments powered by Disqus