CPU
GPU
GeForce GTX TITAN Black
Popular choices:
Radeon R9 Fury X
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.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Per Dollar
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R9 Fury X is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.2% higher G3D Mark score. However, the GeForce GTX TITAN Black offers more VRAM, which may be beneficial for texture-heavy scenarios at higher resolutions.
| Insight | GeForce GTX TITAN Black | Radeon R9 Fury X |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.2%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+50%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | Standard Size (267mm) | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R9 Fury X offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R9 Fury X holds the technical lead. Priced at $80 (vs $120), it costs 33% less, resulting in a 53.4% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GTX TITAN Black | Radeon R9 Fury X |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+53.4%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($120) | ✅More affordable ($80) |
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 TITAN Black and Radeon R9 Fury X
GeForce GTX TITAN Black
The GeForce GTX TITAN Black is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in February 18 2014. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 889 MHz to 980 MHz. It has 2880 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 250W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 9,177 points. Launch price was $999.
Radeon R9 Fury X
The Radeon R9 Fury X is manufactured by AMD. It was released in June 24 2015. It features the GCN 3.0 architecture. The boost clock speed is 1050 MHz. It has 4096 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 9,382 points. Launch price was $649.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GTX TITAN Black scores 9,177 and the Radeon R9 Fury X reaches 9,382 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX TITAN Black is built on Kepler while the Radeon R9 Fury X uses GCN 3.0, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 2,880 (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) vs 4,096 (Radeon R9 Fury X). Raw compute: 5.645 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) vs 8.602 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 Fury X). Boost clocks: 980 MHz vs 1050 MHz.
| Feature | GeForce GTX TITAN Black | Radeon R9 Fury X |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 9,177 | 9,382+2% |
| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 3.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 2880 | 4096+42% |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 5.645 TFLOPS | 8.602 TFLOPS+52% |
| Boost Clock | 980 MHz | 1050 MHz+7% |
| ROPs | 48 | 64+33% |
| TMUs | 240 | 256+7% |
| L1 Cache | 0.23 MB | 1 MB+335% |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 2 MB+33% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GTX TITAN Black | Radeon R9 Fury X |
|---|---|---|
| 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 TITAN Black comes with 6 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 Fury X has 4 GB. The GeForce GTX TITAN Black offers 50% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Memory bandwidth: 336 GB/s (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) vs 512 GB/s (Radeon R9 Fury X) — a 52.4% advantage for the Radeon R9 Fury X. Bus width: 384-bit vs 4096-bit. L2 Cache: 1.5 MB (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) vs 2 MB (Radeon R9 Fury X) — the Radeon R9 Fury X has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GTX TITAN Black | Radeon R9 Fury X |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 6 GB+50% | 4 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | HBM |
| Memory Bandwidth | 336 GB/s | 512 GB/s+52% |
| Bus Width | 384-bit | 4096-bit+967% |
| L2 Cache | 1.5 MB | 2 MB+33% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12.0 (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) vs 12.0 (Radeon R9 Fury X). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.2. OpenGL: 4.6 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.
| Feature | GeForce GTX TITAN Black | Radeon R9 Fury X |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12.0 | 12.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.2 | 1.2 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| Max Displays | 4 | 4 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: NVENC 1.0 (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) vs VCE 3.0 (Radeon R9 Fury X). Decoder: PureVideo HD VP5 vs UVD 6.0. Supported codecs: MPEG-2,H.264 (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) vs MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC (Radeon R9 Fury X).
| Feature | GeForce GTX TITAN Black | Radeon R9 Fury X |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | NVENC 1.0 | VCE 3.0 |
| Decoder | PureVideo HD VP5 | UVD 6.0 |
| Codecs | MPEG-2,H.264 | MPEG-2,H.264,HEVC |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GTX TITAN Black draws 250W versus the Radeon R9 Fury X's 275W — a 9.5% difference. The GeForce GTX TITAN Black is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 600W (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) vs 600W (Radeon R9 Fury X). Power connectors: 6-pin + 8-pin vs 2x 8-pin. Card length: 267mm vs 195mm, occupying 2 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 60°C.
| Feature | GeForce GTX TITAN Black | Radeon R9 Fury X |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 250W-9% | 275W |
| Recommended PSU | 600W | 600W |
| Power Connector | 6-pin + 8-pin | 2x 8-pin |
| Length | 267mm | 195mm |
| Height | 111mm | 115mm |
| Slots | 2 | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 80°C | 60°C-25% |
| Perf/Watt | 36.7+8% | 34.1 |
Value Analysis
The GeForce GTX TITAN Black launched at $999 MSRP and currently averages $120, while the Radeon R9 Fury X launched at $649 and now averages $80. The Radeon R9 Fury X costs 33.3% less ($40 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 76.5 (GeForce GTX TITAN Black) vs 117.3 (Radeon R9 Fury X) — the Radeon R9 Fury X offers 53.3% better value. The Radeon R9 Fury X is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2014).
| Feature | GeForce GTX TITAN Black | Radeon R9 Fury X |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $999 | $649-35% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $120 | $80-33% |
| Performance per Dollar | 76.5 | 117.3+53% |
| Codename | GK110B | Fiji |
| Release | February 18 2014 | June 24 2015 |
| Ranking | #288 | #282 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GTX TITAN Black and Radeon R9 Fury X
