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 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
Higher pixel rate 33.5 GPixel/s vs 27.2 GPixel/s Around 25% higher pixel rate
Better civilization 5 texture decomposition (2013) score 395 vs 339.1 More than 15% better civilization 5 texture decomposition (2013) score
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
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 770 | by techPowerUp!

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.
All they appear to do is pull benchmarks from around the internet, and pick ones that are in favor of Nvidia and Intel. This site is useless trash.
You are the moron. The 280x is faster dumbass.
ya.. i see all gameplay and compare with both graphic , their fps are no much different( depend what games ), but a lot of desktop branded are using Nvidia , so that why i confused. But nevermine , i think i will go to Asus AMD R9 280x. Thanks man. =D
r9 280x, it costs 120 dollars cheaper, and its perfomance is near 770, so if you will by 770 you will just spent your money
Hi All , I so confused AMD R9 280x better or Nvidia GTX 770 better ? My PC is i7-3770k still using Sapphire HD 7750. I want upgrade list at top. Have any suggestion ? Thanks.
such pain~ ... where i live, the GTX 770 is $421.84 and the R9 280X is $ 239.81 WTF nvidia... and even more suprise the gtx 760 is $353.80 when R9 280 is $262.21 again..... WTF nvidia?!
So much retard in one comment.
Even when I typed in the SUPER OC- 1150 MHz version of the R9 280x against the stock GTX 770- the 770 still came out the winner- which makes GPUBOSS a clearly biased site (in some cases) For example, DX9 is one of their test benches. That is ridiculous as they should have known that these cards are both rebadges of previous cards. The 7970 ghz edition (the 280x) doesn't run well on DX9, and the 680 (770) does. Plus, there hasnt been a major title in years that has the option of using DX9 and not DX11. Furthermore, both the BF3 AND bioshock infinite tests are either from a bad card on the AMD side or a bad comp setup that isn't optimized for an AMD card. I had both a 660ti boost and a 270x before upgrading to a Sapphire 280x toxic, and both of the older cards could easily run 60-70 fps on ultra in BSI, and 70-80 fps on BF3 with 2 seconds of tweaking in MSI afterburner. On my toxic I NEVER drop below 150 fps, and thats at the stock 1150 MHz. All other tests on youtube, Linustechtips, TekSyndicate, NCIX, Newegg concur: the 280X (besides the stock versions) either are neck and neck, or outperform the 770. Even FURTHER: GPUB use CIV 5 as a testbench, a game that has NVIDIA in its freakin title and is optimized for nvidia cards on DX10 and DX11, yet they don't do ANY openCL/GL benchmarks, things that AMD excels at, and hell, they don't even use UNIGINE valley/heaven benchmarks, pretty much the most unbiased, standard FPS benchmark available. They only test 4 year old games like BF3 before BF4 was optimized for AMD cards for god knows why, and their texturecomp bench was on a game that nvidia keeps on its payroll (no poke at civ5, probably my favorite game of all time.) It's almost laughable, because they concede that the 280X has more memory, wider bus width, more stream processors, and higher scores on API's that actually matter (DX11 and Mantle, anyone?) yet the 770 HAS BETTER 3DMARK 06 POWER, SO IT MUST BE BETTER, RIGHT? Wrong. My 780 toxic beasts any 770 besides the MSI lightning card (which is so good it's practically a slightly underclocked 780). "Real world" gaming tests? I think not. Especially since until a few months ago this site had my laptop's 3 year old i5 beating out my FX-8350. Not nvidia and processors rather than graphics, but laughable all the same.
That's a neat build. It's way too late to say this, but for others out there, or if you haven't made up your mind yet, I'll say this. Firstly, off-topic, I know, but I must say it, if you want to multitask and load faster, I'd suggest you pick up 8GB of RAM rather than 4. It's the new standard. As for the cards, go for the 770 if you live in the US or any Bitcoining country, the 280X has steeped up too much in those places as it's better at mining. Otherwise, it's totally up to you. If you play Battlefield a lot, or you use 2 monitors, or if you want to invest in AMD's Mantle project, something that does have potential, pick the 280X. But if you play Assassin's Creed, Mafia, the Batman Arkham series, or any other nVidia-optimised videogame (there are many more out there,) if you like recording your gameplay, pick the 770. What matters more to you? That's totally your choice. Choose wisely, you're about to buy yourself into either one of two very separate ends of the gaming universe. Have fun and game hard!
AMD has always performed flawlessly for me. I still have ALL of my amd cards and they work perfectly. ALL of my nvidia cards have failed. The ONLY artifacting I have ever experienced was from an Nvidia 8600 gt and an Nvidia 8800gts... Imagine that. Never again. I love my R9 280x and my R9 m290.
the k series DO support Vt-X..
Can't you just install a legacy driver that was stable?
omfg go watch r9 vids since january 2014...bad vram...heavy overclocked...many artifacts... that extra 1gddr5 is so yummy and the price even more but at the end RMA nightmare like many already...sorry "amd defend the little ones fan"...
you are a moron...good artifacting ;)
Want to make these comparisons to be fair?! Try comparing Radeon and GeForce cards of identical price! Then see who wins
ummm.. no.. I get 92 FPS on the R9 280x on the highest settings.. 379 on civ v, 135 on bf3, 28,658 on 3d mark06.. I own a HIS Iceq 280x so that be why, but why lie.. Use the right card are you using the shittest one and underclocking?
My XFX Double D R9 280x has far superior specs then this one your website shows.. You guys seem to favor Nividia.
this is horse shit!... i am never visiting this site ever again.. its so biased
But you don't have hardware virtualization (vt-x) with the K version processors. It sucks.
This website is stupid. I have yet to see AMD win on here with its Nvidia counter part. Lame.
Maybe nVidia pay them to make their cards look superior or maybe this website is secretly owned by nVidia themselves?
my old gpu gtx690 has been killed by nvidia driver 320.18 So,, i'm going with AMD
Thats pretty biased, both amd and nividia come pretty close in gaming performance these days.
Thanks, I will buy sapphire r9 280x, It's seems to be right choice.
Go for r9 280x, factory overclocked and a good brand if you can. I got ASUS r9 280x directCU TOP and i'm loving it. It's faster than gtx 770 in almost all game and bench. tests and cheaper. The comparison here is Nvidia-fanboy made. 770 is only a few % faster than reference 280x.
comments powered by Disqus