
GeForce GTX 760A vs Radeon R9 M270X

GeForce GTX 760A
Popular choices:

Radeon R9 M270X
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GTX 760A is positioned at rank 483 and the Radeon R9 M270X is on rank 484, so the GeForce GTX 760A offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 760A
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R9 M270X
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 760A is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.8% higher G3D Mark score. However, the Radeon R9 M270X offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 760A | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.8%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.8%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+700%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GTX 760A offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce GTX 760A holds the technical lead. Priced at $40 (vs $40), it costs 0% less, resulting in a 1.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX 760A | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+1.8%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
Performance Check
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 7800X3D 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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 760A and Radeon R9 M270X

GeForce GTX 760A
The GeForce GTX 760A is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 17 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 628 MHz to 657 MHz. It has 768 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 55W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,226 points.

Radeon R9 M270X
The Radeon R9 M270X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in March 21 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 725 MHz to 775 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,204 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX 760A scores 1,226 and the Radeon R9 M270X reaches 1,204 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.8% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 760A is built on Kepler while the Radeon R9 M270X uses GCN 1.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 768 (GeForce GTX 760A) vs 640 (Radeon R9 M270X). Raw compute: 1.009 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 760A) vs 0.992 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 M270X). Boost clocks: 657 MHz vs 775 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 760A | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,226+2% | 1,204 |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 1.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 768+20% | 640 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.009 TFLOPS+2% | 0.992 TFLOPS |
| Boost Clock | 657 MHz | 775 MHz+18% |
| ROPs | 16 | 16 |
| TMUs | 64+60% | 40 |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | 160 KB+150% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX 760A | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | FSR 3 (Compatible) | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | AMD Anti-Lag |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GTX 760A comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 M270X has 4 GB. The Radeon R9 M270X offers 700% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 760A | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 4 GB+700% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX 760A draws 55W versus the Radeon R9 M270X's 75W — a 30.8% difference. The GeForce GTX 760A is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GTX 760A) vs 350W (Radeon R9 M270X). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs Mobile.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 760A | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 55W-27% | 75W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | Mobile |
| Slots | 0 | — |
| Temp (Load) | 85°C | — |
| Perf/Watt | 22.3+39% | 16.1 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX 760A launched at $249 MSRP and currently averages $40, while the Radeon R9 M270X launched at $250 and now averages $40. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 30.6 (GeForce GTX 760A) vs 30.1 (Radeon R9 M270X) — the GeForce GTX 760A offers 1.7% better value.
| Feature | GeForce GTX 760A | Radeon R9 M270X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $249 | $250 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $40 | $40 |
| Performance per Dollar | 30.6+2% | 30.1 |
| Codename | GK106 | Venus |
| Release | March 17 2014 | March 21 2014 |
| Ranking | #813 | #819 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
















