Radeon HD 2900 XT vs GeForce GTS 160M
Radeon HD 2900 XT
Popular choices:
GeForce GTS 160M
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 Radeon HD 2900 XT is positioned at rank 666 and the GeForce GTS 160M is on rank 275, so the GeForce GTS 160M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon HD 2900 XT
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTS 160M
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTS 160M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.9% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon HD 2900 XT.
| Insight | Radeon HD 2900 XT | GeForce GTS 160M |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.9%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.9%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2012 / Kepler (2012−2018)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon HD 2900 XT offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon HD 2900 XT holds the technical lead. Priced at $20 (vs $30), it costs 33% less, resulting in a 45.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon HD 2900 XT | GeForce GTS 160M |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+45.8%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($20) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($30) |
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 Radeon HD 2900 XT and GeForce GTS 160M
Radeon HD 2900 XT
The Radeon HD 2900 XT is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 7 2013. It features the TeraScale 2 architecture. The core clock speed is 725 MHz. It has 480 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 25W. Manufactured using 40 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 660 points.
GeForce GTS 160M
The GeForce GTS 160M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 22 2012. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from Up to 900 MHz to 950 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 45W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 679 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon HD 2900 XT scores 660 and the GeForce GTS 160M reaches 679 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.9% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon HD 2900 XT is built on TeraScale 2 while the GeForce GTS 160M uses Kepler, both on 40 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 480 (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 384 (GeForce GTS 160M). Raw compute: 0.696 TFLOPS (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 0.7296 TFLOPS (GeForce GTS 160M).
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | GeForce GTS 160M |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 660 | 679+3% |
| Architecture | TeraScale 2 | Kepler |
| Process Node | 40 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 480+25% | 384 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.696 TFLOPS | 0.7296 TFLOPS+5% |
| ROPs | 8 | 16+100% |
| TMUs | 24 | 32+33% |
| L1 Cache | 48 KB+50% | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | GeForce GTS 160M |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
Both cards feature 1 GB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit.
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | GeForce GTS 160M |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 10.0 (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTS 160M). Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | GeForce GTS 160M |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 10.0 | 11.1 (10_0)+11% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: UVD+ (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs PureVideo HD VP2 (GeForce GTS 160M). Decoder: UVD+ vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: H.264 (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTS 160M).
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | GeForce GTS 160M |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | UVD+ | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Decoder | UVD+ | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Codecs | H.264 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon HD 2900 XT draws 25W versus the GeForce GTS 160M's 45W — a 57.1% difference. The Radeon HD 2900 XT is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 350W (GeForce GTS 160M). Power connectors: 1x 6-pin vs Legacy.
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | GeForce GTS 160M |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 25W-44% | 45W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | 1x 6-pin | Legacy |
| Length | 241mm | — |
| Slots | 2 | 0-100% |
| Temp (Load) | — | 90°C |
| Perf/Watt | 26.4+75% | 15.1 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon HD 2900 XT costs 33.3% less ($10 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 33.0 (Radeon HD 2900 XT) vs 22.6 (GeForce GTS 160M) — the Radeon HD 2900 XT offers 46% better value. The Radeon HD 2900 XT is the newer GPU (2013 vs 2012).
| Feature | Radeon HD 2900 XT | GeForce GTS 160M |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $399 | — |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20-33% | $30 |
| Performance per Dollar | 33.0+46% | 22.6 |
| Codename | Thames | GK107 |
| Release | January 7 2013 | March 22 2012 |
| Ranking | #883 | #828 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon HD 2900 XT and GeForce GTS 160M
