Radeon R7 +8G vs GeForce GTX 295
Radeon R7 +8G
Popular choices:
GeForce GTX 295
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 R7 +8G is positioned at rank 217 and the GeForce GTX 295 is on rank 301, so the Radeon R7 +8G offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Radeon R7 +8G
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GTX 295
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The Radeon R7 +8G is significantly newer (2015 vs 2009). The Radeon R7 +8G likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The GeForce GTX 295 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GTX 295 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 0.6% higher G3D Mark score and 250% more VRAM (2 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the Radeon R7 +8G.
| Insight | Radeon R7 +8G | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-0.6%) | ✅Leading raw performance (+0.6%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2015 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2009 / Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+250%) |
| Efficiency | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption |
| Case Fit | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly | Standard Size (267mm) |
💎 Value Proposition
The Radeon R7 +8G offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the Radeon R7 +8G holds the technical lead. Priced at $20 (vs $50), it costs 60% less, resulting in a 148.5% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R7 +8G | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+148.5%) | ❌Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅More affordable ($20) | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($50) |
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 R7 +8G and GeForce GTX 295
Radeon R7 +8G
The Radeon R7 +8G is manufactured by AMD. It was released in May 5 2015. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 900 MHz to 915 MHz. It has 640 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 1,191 points.
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.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R7 +8G scores 1,191 and the GeForce GTX 295 reaches 1,198 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.6% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R7 +8G is built on GCN 1.0 while the GeForce GTX 295 uses Tesla 2.0, both on 28 nm vs 55 nm. Shader units: 640 (Radeon R7 +8G) vs 480 (GeForce GTX 295). Raw compute: 1.171 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 +8G) vs 0.5962 TFLOPS ×2 (GeForce GTX 295).
| Feature | Radeon R7 +8G | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 1,191 | 1,198 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Shading Units | 640+33% | 480 ×2 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 1.171 TFLOPS+96% | 0.5962 TFLOPS ×2 |
| ROPs | 16 | 28 ×2+75% |
| TMUs | 40 | 80 ×2+100% |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB+14% | 224 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R7 +8G | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 2.1 (Compatible) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | FSR 3 (Compatible) |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | AMD Anti-Lag | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The Radeon R7 +8G comes with 512 MB of VRAM, while the GeForce GTX 295 has 2 GB. The GeForce GTX 295 offers 250% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 256 KB (Radeon R7 +8G) vs 224 KB (GeForce GTX 295) — the Radeon R7 +8G has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | Radeon R7 +8G | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 1.75 GB+250% |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB+14% | 224 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_1) (Radeon R7 +8G) vs 11.1 (10_0) (GeForce GTX 295). OpenGL: 4.6 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon R7 +8G | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_1)+8% | 11.1 (10_0) |
| OpenGL | 4.6+39% | 3.3 |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 2.0 (Radeon R7 +8G) vs PureVideo HD VP2 (GeForce GTX 295). Decoder: UVD 4.0 vs PureVideo HD VP2. Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-4,VC-1,MPEG-2 (Radeon R7 +8G) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce GTX 295).
| Feature | Radeon R7 +8G | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 2.0 | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Decoder | UVD 4.0 | PureVideo HD VP2 |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-4,VC-1,MPEG-2 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R7 +8G draws 30W versus the GeForce GTX 295's 289W — a 162.4% difference. The Radeon R7 +8G is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R7 +8G) vs 680W (GeForce GTX 295). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin. Card length: 168mm vs 267mm, occupying 1 vs 2 slots. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 95°C.
| Feature | Radeon R7 +8G | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W-90% | 289W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W-49% | 680W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |
| Length | 168mm | 267mm |
| Height | 111mm | 111mm |
| Slots | 1-50% | 2 |
| Temp (Load) | 75-21% | 95°C |
| Perf/Watt | 39.7+868% | 4.1 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R7 +8G launched at $49 MSRP and currently averages $20, while the GeForce GTX 295 launched at $499 and now averages $50. The Radeon R7 +8G costs 60% less ($30 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 59.5 (Radeon R7 +8G) vs 24.0 (GeForce GTX 295) — the Radeon R7 +8G offers 147.9% better value. The Radeon R7 +8G is the newer GPU (2015 vs 2009).
| Feature | Radeon R7 +8G | GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $49-90% | $499 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20-60% | $50 |
| Performance per Dollar | 59.5+148% | 24.0 |
| Codename | Tropo | GT200B |
| Release | May 5 2015 | January 8 2009 |
| Ranking | #737 | #816 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R7 +8G and GeForce GTX 295
