GeForce GTX 295 vs Radeon R5 430 OEM

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

GeForce GTX 295 vs Radeon R5 430 OEM FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce GTX 295 vs Radeon R5 430 OEM: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce GTX 295

2009

Why buy it

✅78.1% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 2.4 vs 0 G3D/$ ($499 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅250% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (2 GB vs 512 MB).

Trade-offs

❌2009 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌478% higher power demand at 289W vs 50W.

Radeon R5 430 OEM

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 50W instead of 289W, a 239W reduction.
✅More future proof: GCN 1.0 (2012−2020) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 295 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 512 MB vs 2 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2016 hardware with 512 MB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 2.4 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $499 MSRP).

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce GTX 295 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 78.1% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data. PassMark G3D leans toward Radeon R5 430 OEM instead at 1,200 vs 1,198, so for this question the real-game FPS result matters more than the synthetic split.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 295 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 2 GB vs 512 MB of VRAM. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce GTX 295 makes the most sense today based on the pricing and value data we have for this matchup.

GeForce GTX 295 vs Radeon R5 430 OEM Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce GTX 295

The GeForce GTX 295 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 8 2009. It features the Tesla 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 576 MHz. It has 480 ×2 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 289W. Manufactured using 55 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,198 points. Launch price was $500.

Radeon R5 430 OEM

The Radeon R5 430 OEM is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 30 2016. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 730 MHz to 780 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,200 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 295 scores 1,198 and the Radeon R5 430 OEM reaches 1,200 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 295 is built on Tesla 2.0 while the Radeon R5 430 OEM uses GCN 1.0, both on 55 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 480 (GeForce GTX 295) vs 384 (Radeon R5 430 OEM). Raw compute: 0.5962 TFLOPS ×2 (GeForce GTX 295) vs 0.599 TFLOPS (Radeon R5 430 OEM).

Feature	GeForce GTX 295	Radeon R5 430 OEM
G3D Mark Score	1,198	1,200
Architecture	Tesla 2.0	GCN 1.0
Process Node	55 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	480 ×2+25%	384
Compute (TFLOPS)	0.5962 TFLOPS ×2	0.599 TFLOPS
ROPs	28 ×2+250%	8
TMUs	80 ×2+233%	24
L2 Cache	224 KB	256 KB+14%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 295 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R5 430 OEM leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce GTX 295	Radeon R5 430 OEM
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 295 has 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R5 430 OEM carries 512 MB. GeForce GTX 295 gives you 250% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 295 and System on the Radeon R5 430 OEM. L2 Cache: 224 KB (GeForce GTX 295) vs 256 KB (Radeon R5 430 OEM) — the Radeon R5 430 OEM has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 295	Radeon R5 430 OEM
VRAM Capacity	1.75 GB+250%	0.5 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	Shared
Memory Bandwidth	Unknown	System
Bus Width	128-bit	System
L2 Cache	224 KB	256 KB+14%

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 295 draws 289W versus the Radeon R5 430 OEM's 50W — a 141% difference. The Radeon R5 430 OEM is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 680W (GeForce GTX 295) vs 250W (Radeon R5 430 OEM). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin vs None.

Feature	GeForce GTX 295	Radeon R5 430 OEM
TDP	289W	50W-83%
Recommended PSU	680W	250W-63%
Power Connector	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	None
Length	267mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	—
Temp (Load)	95°C	—
Perf/Watt	4.1	24.0+485%

💰

Value Analysis

The newer card here is Radeon R5 430 OEM (2016 vs 2009).

Feature	GeForce GTX 295	Radeon R5 430 OEM
MSRP	$499	—
Codename	GT200B	Oland
Release	January 8 2009	June 30 2016
Ranking	#816	#874

Search GeForce GTX 295 on Amazon

Search Radeon R5 430 OEM on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.