GPUBoss Review Our evaluation of R9 295X2 vs TITAN X among Desktop GPUs

Gaming

Radeon R9 295X2
n.d.
GeForce GTX TITAN X
9.4
GeForce GTX TITAN Z
7.2
Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 21 more

Graphics

Radeon R9 295X2
9.2
GeForce GTX TITAN X
8.9
GeForce GTX TITAN Z
7.9
T-Rex, Manhattan, Cloud Gate Factor, Sky Diver Factor and 1 more

Computing

Radeon R9 295X2
8.0
GeForce GTX TITAN X
8.3
GeForce GTX TITAN Z
7.6
Face Detection, Ocean Surface Simulation and 3 more

Performance per Watt

Radeon R9 295X2
6.8
GeForce GTX TITAN X
8.8
GeForce GTX TITAN Z
6.8
Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Value

Radeon R9 295X2
n.d.
GeForce GTX TITAN X
n.d.
GeForce GTX TITAN Z
n.d.
Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Bioshock Infinite and 32 more

Noise and Power

Radeon R9 295X2
5.7
GeForce GTX TITAN X
7.9
GeForce GTX TITAN Z
6.8
TDP, Idle Power Consumption, Load Power Consumption and 2 more
9

Overall Score

Radeon R9 295X2
8.3
GeForce GTX TITAN X
9.0
GeForce GTX TITAN Z
7.5

Winner
Nvidia GeForce GTX TITAN X 

GPUBoss recommends the Nvidia GeForce GTX TITAN X  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!
VS

XFX Radeon R9 295X2

Front view of Radeon R9 295X2
Front view of GeForce GTX TITAN X

Nvidia GeForce GTX TITAN X

GPUBoss Winner
Join the discussion

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Radeon R9 295X2

Reasons to consider the
XFX Radeon R9 295X2

Report a correction
Is dual GPU Yes vs No About half of graphics cards are dual GPU
Much better floating-point performance 11,466 GFLOPS vs 6,144 GFLOPS More than 85% better floating-point performance
Much higher texture rate 358.4 GTexel/s vs 192 GTexel/s More than 85% higher texture rate
Many more shading units 5,632 vs 3,072 2560 more shading units
Many more texture mapping units 352 vs 192 160 more texture mapping units
Much wider memory bus 1,024 bit vs 384 bit Around 2.8x wider memory bus
Significantly higher pixel rate 130.4 GPixel/s vs 96 GPixel/s More than 35% higher pixel rate
Significantly more render output processors 128 vs 96 32 more render output processors
Better video composition score 79.34 frames/s vs 37.25 frames/s Around 2.2x better video composition score
Front view of GeForce GTX TITAN X

Reasons to consider the
Nvidia GeForce GTX TITAN X

Report a correction
Significantly better PassMark score 10,669 vs 7,462 Around 45% better PassMark score
Significantly more memory 12,288 MB vs 8,192 MB 50% more memory
Significantly higher effective memory clock speed 7,012 MHz vs 5,000 MHz More than 40% higher effective memory clock speed
Much better PassMark direct compute score 6,279 vs 3,456 More than 80% better PassMark direct compute score
Significantly higher memory clock speed 1,753 MHz vs 1,250 MHz More than 40% higher memory clock speed
Much lower TDP 250W vs 500W 2x lower TDP

Benchmarks Real world tests of Radeon R9 295X2 vs GeForce GTX TITAN X

PassMark Industry standard benchmark for overall graphics card performanceData courtesy Passmark

Radeon R9 295X2
7,462
GeForce GTX TITAN X
10,669

Bitcoin mining Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 295X2
614.07 mHash/s
GeForce GTX TITAN X
325.33 mHash/s

Face detection Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 295X2
116.41 mPixels/s
GeForce GTX TITAN X
232.25 mPixels/s

Ocean surface simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 295X2
1,997.66 frames/s
GeForce GTX TITAN X
1,712.96 frames/s

Particle simulation Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 295X2
651.4 mInteraction/s
GeForce GTX TITAN X
1,492.64 mInteraction/s

T-Rex (Compubench 1.5) Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 295X2
10.68 frames/s
GeForce GTX TITAN X
11.39 frames/s

Video composition Data courtesy CompuBench

Radeon R9 295X2
79.34 frames/s
GeForce GTX TITAN X
37.25 frames/s

PassMark Direct Compute Measures performance of general-purpose computing using Microsoft DirectCompute

Radeon R9 295X2
3,456
GeForce GTX TITAN X
6,279

Reviews Word on the street

Radeon R9 295X2  vs GeForce GTX TITAN X 
8.6
read review
8.8
read review
Dialing in our highest stable clocks now, we suddenly saw the expected performance gains.
GeForce GTX TITAN X

Comments

Showing 25 comments.
Ding diubciheb (04:55 AM, June 28, 2016)
This webstie isn't a trusty source anyway, they said the Gtx 710 was better than the 295x so if you don't want to look like a complete idiot when you shit talk AMD don't use this site.
Stephanie Lauterbach (08:50 AM, April 12, 2016)
so where is amd in the hall of fame of firestrike.....long way down. nough said..
AMDOUCHES vs NVIIOTS . . . lol (04:04 AM, March 3, 2016)
idk if you know, but the 980 ti is better than the titan series, in gaming anyway. but yes, this site will purposely use crappy drivers from amd without updating them. if look on this site, cards like the r9 270 and the r9 290 are performing way below than what they are supposed to in average frame rate tests.
Bill hater (05:08 PM, February 1, 2016)
Can we stop and talk about how bogus these results are? The 295 destroys the Titan x, yes it's because it has 2 GPu cores. This just shows how bias this site is. They even get the power usage chart wrong. The 295 uses way more power, over 500w on load, but it looks better for the titans bar to be bigger. And in the pros they list the some bias bench twice. Nvidia and AMD fans have to agree on one thing. This site is crap!
Guest (08:33 PM, January 25, 2016)
all of you need to stfu and buy the GPU you want, stop debating like dimwits, most of you probably couldnt afford either of these.
FireItUp (10:18 PM, December 17, 2015)
LMFAO!!! "We give a shit about power draw, because of our environment". Are you fck'n kidding me?? And are you really trying to compare a fck'n laptop to desktop cards?? Laptop cards are designed to draw less power regardless which one it is. Go back to 101 Gerd. And the only two ways any of these power consumptions make ANY significant difference is if you have no life and are playing WoW all day long while still living in your parents basement...or you work in a design field, from home, where you are always working on something intense. And even in that last scenario, the electricity use would be a write-off. Both are great cards. I have always preferred Nvidia cards for gaming and Radeon cards for design work. And yes, for those that are still wet behind the ears, Radeon was always the industry leader for graphics outside of gaming. And if you don't believe me ask Apple why they always had the Radeon cards as premium cards for their MacPro towers. And last but not least...TO EACH THEIR OWN, as these types of discussions will always be around for any product we use because as consumers its in our shitty nature to stick up for our reasons in buying what we do.
Jeroen van Son (07:12 PM, November 5, 2015)
what if nvidea made dual-GPU Card With GM200 cores inside.... mmm i think AMD has to come a long way
Jeroen van Son (07:10 PM, November 5, 2015)
at idle it would not have the same tdp i bet the AMD r9 295x2 draws more power even when idle because the other core doesnt shutdown fully
Shao Zapomnit (10:33 PM, October 21, 2015)
Yes it will.
Matt_ThatOneTechGuy (01:14 AM, August 31, 2015)
So for AMD to beat Nvidia they need a dual GPU? With twice the TDP as well. But Nvidia still needs to try harder apparently
Steve Bike (03:52 AM, August 30, 2015)
It consumes twice the power at load. When what your doing isn't demanding 1 of the gpu's in the 295 shuts off so it's the same. TDP at idle.
José Bauer Rodrigues Jr. (02:20 AM, July 31, 2015)
esse site é mentiroso demais vejam outro site http://www.hwcompare.com/18598/geforce-gtx-titan-x-vs-radeon-r9-295x2/
José Bauer Rodrigues Jr. (02:18 AM, July 31, 2015)
A maior piada do mundo kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
Augusto Terceiro Fernandes de (09:52 PM, July 3, 2015)
It's a joke Direct X 12 is coming!!!
Mr. Keyes (03:42 PM, June 26, 2015)
They only account for the one r9 gpu...? It should still be wooping butt
The Spooky Ghost (02:52 AM, June 23, 2015)
Because a system using that much power will probably increase your power bill by $300-400 per year?
José Bauer Rodrigues Jr. (10:33 PM, June 18, 2015)
mentirosoooooooooooooo ,foda né kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk, esse site é a maior piada do mundoooo kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk
MrGerdbrecht (05:38 AM, June 14, 2015)
We give shit about power draw, because of our environment, retard. I bought a laptop with i7 4720HQ + GTX970 and it consumes 30W ( green mode ) and max 120 W in BF4 60+ FPS, i would always pay more for higher efficiency ( that is the real value for me ).
gabriel (12:28 PM, June 12, 2015)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvDQzYhP05k
Alex Riddle (05:02 PM, June 7, 2015)
I'll just leave this here... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HvDQzYhP05k
Michael Norris (03:22 AM, June 3, 2015)
A Titan X2 would just ravage a r9 295x2,right now tho unless you want a lot of Vram i would just buy a 980Ti to get TitanX performance.
Andrew Osei (07:16 AM, June 1, 2015)
Haven't seen one personally but it seems over 10 websites I have visited it's only on this one that proves the titan x beats the R9 295x2...and beats it by that much? Lol :x I think there's a problem here...the 7990 might even beat the titan x imho :)
Andrew Osei (07:09 AM, June 1, 2015)
Yes I do...using 2 R9 290 in crossfire and it has given me no problems till now...the titan x and titan z are two products that just screams "for blind fan boys". Will never spend a dime on such a useless product
Crevarius (12:35 AM, June 1, 2015)
Why do you feel the need to throw insults about the cards? Let the facts stand on their own... childish responses don't help anyone make informed decisions.
Crevarius (12:34 AM, June 1, 2015)
It's absolutely clear you have no experience with multi-GPU cards or you wouldn't be spouting this nonsense.
comments powered by Disqus

features

information

  • terms and privacy
  • about
  • blog

on the web

GPUBoss