
GeForce GTX 760 Ti
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 M395X
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
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.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.
GeForce GTX 760 Ti
2013Why buy it
- ✅1.0% more average FPS across 49 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $351 less on MSRP ($249 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 149.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 21.3 vs 8.5 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌233.3% higher power demand at 250W vs 75W.
Radeon R9 M395X
2015Why buy it
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 250W, a 175W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 760 Ti across 49 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌141% HIGHER MSRP$600 MSRPvs$249 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 8.5 vs 21.3 G3D/$ ($600 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
GeForce GTX 760 Ti
2013Radeon R9 M395X
2015Why buy it
- ✅1.0% more average FPS across 49 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ✅Costs $351 less on MSRP ($249 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 149.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 21.3 vs 8.5 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs $600 MSRP).
Why buy it
- ✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
- ✅Draws 75W instead of 250W, a 175W reduction.
- ✅More future proof: GCN 3.0 (2014−2019) on 28nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.
Trade-offs
- ❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌233.3% higher power demand at 250W vs 75W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 760 Ti across 49 tracked games in our benchmark data.
- ❌Very weak future-proofing: 2015-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
- ❌141% HIGHER MSRP$600 MSRPvs$249 MSRP
- ❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 8.5 vs 21.3 G3D/$ ($600 MSRP vs $249 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is GeForce GTX 760 Ti better than Radeon R9 M395X?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?
When does Radeon R9 M395X make more sense than GeForce GTX 760 Ti?
Games Benchmarks
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 760 Ti | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 89 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 74 FPS | 69 FPS |
| high | 59 FPS | 57 FPS |
| ultra | 40 FPS | 37 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 71 FPS | 71 FPS |
| medium | 59 FPS | 62 FPS |
| high | 43 FPS | 45 FPS |
| ultra | 29 FPS | 29 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 29 FPS | 26 FPS |
| medium | 26 FPS | 24 FPS |
| high | 19 FPS | 16 FPS |
| ultra | 16 FPS | 14 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | GeForce GTX 760 Ti | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 159 FPS | 96 FPS |
| medium | 129 FPS | 74 FPS |
| high | 102 FPS | 61 FPS |
| ultra | 73 FPS | 44 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 106 FPS | 58 FPS |
| medium | 77 FPS | 41 FPS |
| high | 60 FPS | 31 FPS |
| ultra | 42 FPS | 23 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 43 FPS | 23 FPS |
| medium | 35 FPS | 16 FPS |
| high | 32 FPS | 13 FPS |
| ultra | 24 FPS | 9 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | GeForce GTX 760 Ti | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 239 FPS | 230 FPS |
| medium | 191 FPS | 184 FPS |
| high | 159 FPS | 154 FPS |
| ultra | 119 FPS | 115 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 179 FPS | 173 FPS |
| medium | 143 FPS | 138 FPS |
| high | 119 FPS | 115 FPS |
| ultra | 90 FPS | 86 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 119 FPS | 115 FPS |
| medium | 96 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 80 FPS | 77 FPS |
| ultra | 60 FPS | 58 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | GeForce GTX 760 Ti | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 138 FPS | 139 FPS |
| medium | 111 FPS | 113 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 97 FPS |
| ultra | 75 FPS | 81 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 101 FPS | 104 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 85 FPS |
| high | 69 FPS | 74 FPS |
| ultra | 54 FPS | 57 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 60 FPS | 61 FPS |
| medium | 46 FPS | 47 FPS |
| high | 36 FPS | 37 FPS |
| ultra | 26 FPS | 26 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 760 Ti and Radeon R9 M395X

GeForce GTX 760 Ti
GeForce GTX 760 Ti
The GeForce GTX 760 Ti is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in November 7 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 875 MHz to 928 MHz. It has 2880 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,307 points. Launch price was $699.

Radeon R9 M395X
Radeon R9 M395X
The Radeon R9 M395X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 723 MHz. It has 2048 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 5,120 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 760 Ti scores 5,307 and the Radeon R9 M395X reaches 5,120 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 3.7% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 760 Ti is built on Kepler while the Radeon R9 M395X uses GCN 3.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,880 (GeForce GTX 760 Ti) vs 2,048 (Radeon R9 M395X). Raw compute: 5.345 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 760 Ti) vs 2.961 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M395X).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 760 Ti | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 5,307+4% | 5,120 |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2880+41% | 2048 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.345 TFLOPS+81% | 2.961 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 48+50% | 32 |
| TMUs | 240+88% | 128 |
| L1 Cache | 240 KB | 512 KB+113% |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+200% | 0.5 MB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
The GeForce GTX 760 Ti gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon R9 M395X relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 760 Ti | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| 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 760 Ti comes with 2 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 M395X has 4 GB. The Radeon R9 M395X offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 192 GB/s (GeForce GTX 760 Ti) vs 160 GB/s (Radeon R9 M395X) — a 20% advantage for the GeForce GTX 760 Ti. Bus width: 256-bit vs 256-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX 760 Ti) vs 0.5 MB (Radeon R9 M395X) — the GeForce GTX 760 Ti has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 760 Ti | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 2 GB | 4 GB+100% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | 192 GB/s+20% | 160 GB/s |
| Bus Width | 256-bit | 256-bit |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB+200% | 0.5 MB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 760 Ti draws 250W versus the Radeon R9 M395X's 75W — a 107.7% difference. The Radeon R9 M395X is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (GeForce GTX 760 Ti) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M395X). Power connectors: 2x 6-pin vs Mobile.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 760 Ti | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W | 75W-70% |
| Recommended PSU | 500W | 350W-30% |
| Power Connector | 2x 6-pin | Mobile |
| Length | 241mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | — |
| Perf/Watt | 21.2 | 68.3+222% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 760 Ti launched at $249 MSRP, while the Radeon R9 M395X launched at $600. The GeForce GTX 760 Ti costs 58.5% less ($351 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 21.3 (GeForce GTX 760 Ti) vs 8.5 (Radeon R9 M395X) — the GeForce GTX 760 Ti offers 150.6% better value. The Radeon R9 M395X is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2013).
| Feature | GeForce GTX 760 Ti | Radeon R9 M395X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $249-59% | $600 |
| Performance per Dollar | 21.3+151% | 8.5 |
| Codename | GK110B | Amethyst |
| Release | November 7 2013 | May 5 2015 |
| Ranking | #278 | #438 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.













