CPU
GPU
Radeon R7 A265
Popular choices:
GeForce GT 1010
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 A265 is positioned at rank 427 and the GeForce GT 1010 is on rank 98, so the GeForce GT 1010 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 A265
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 1010
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
⚠️ Generational Difference
The GeForce GT 1010 is significantly newer (2021 vs 2014). The GeForce GT 1010 likely supports modern features like Ray Tracing, Tensor Cores, and DLSS/FSR upscaling, which act as force multipliers for performance. The Radeon R7 A265 lacks this hardware feature set, limiting its longevity in modern titles despite any raw power similarities.
🚀 Performance Leadership
The Radeon R7 A265 is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 2.3% higher G3D Mark score. This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce GT 1010.
| Insight | Radeon R7 A265 | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+2.3%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-2.3%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2014 / GCN 1.0 (2012−2020)) | Pascal (2016−2021) (14nm) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ❌ Less VRAM capacity | ✅ More VRAM (+0%) |
| Efficiency | Normal Efficiency | Normal Efficiency |
| Case Fit | — | 📏 Compact / SFF Friendly |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce GT 1010 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. Priced at $70 versus $149 for the Radeon R7 A265, it costs 53% less. While it maintains basic entry-level capabilities, this results in a 108.1% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | Radeon R7 A265 | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+108.1%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($149) | ✅More affordable ($70) |
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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Radeon R7 A265 and GeForce GT 1010
Radeon R7 A265
The Radeon R7 A265 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in January 9 2014. It features the GCN 1.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 725 MHz to 825 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 994 points.
GeForce GT 1010
The GeForce GT 1010 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in January 13 2021. It features the Pascal architecture. The core clock ranges from 1228 MHz to 1468 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 30W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 972 points.
Graphics Performance
The Radeon R7 A265 scores 994 and the GeForce GT 1010 reaches 972 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 2.3% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The Radeon R7 A265 is built on GCN 1.0 while the GeForce GT 1010 uses Pascal, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 384 (Radeon R7 A265) vs 256 (GeForce GT 1010). Raw compute: 0.6336 TFLOPS (Radeon R7 A265) vs 0.7516 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 1010). Boost clocks: 825 MHz vs 1468 MHz.
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 994+2% | 972 |
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Pascal |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+50% | 256 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.6336 TFLOPS | 0.7516 TFLOPS+19% |
| Boost Clock | 825 MHz | 1468 MHz+78% |
| ROPs | 8 | 16+100% |
| TMUs | 24+50% | 16 |
| L1 Cache | 96 KB+200% | 32 KB |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 512 MB of GDDR5. Bus width: 128-bit vs 64-bit.
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 0.5 GB | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit+100% | 64-bit |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | 256 KB |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 12 (11_1) (Radeon R7 A265) vs 12 (12_1) (GeForce GT 1010). Vulkan: 1.1 vs 1.4. OpenGL: 4.5 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (12_1) |
| Vulkan | 1.1 | 1.4+27% |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 4.6+2% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: VCE 1.0 (Radeon R7 A265) vs None (GeForce GT 1010). Decoder: UVD 4.0 vs VP8 (Feature Set H). Supported codecs: H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 (Radeon R7 A265) vs H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 (GeForce GT 1010).
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | VCE 1.0 | None |
| Decoder | UVD 4.0 | VP8 (Feature Set H) |
| Codecs | H.264,MPEG-2,VC-1 | H.264,H.265 (HEVC),VP8,VP9,MPEG-2,VC-1 |
Power & Dimensions
The Radeon R7 A265 draws 30W versus the GeForce GT 1010's 30W — a 0% difference. The GeForce GT 1010 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (Radeon R7 A265) vs 300W (GeForce GT 1010). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs None. Typical load temperature: 75 vs 75.
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 30W | 30W |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 300W-14% |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | None |
| Length | — | 147mm |
| Height | — | 69mm |
| Slots | 0-100% | 1 |
| Temp (Load) | 75 | 75 |
| Perf/Watt | 33.1+2% | 32.4 |
Value Analysis
The Radeon R7 A265 launched at $149 MSRP and currently averages $149, while the GeForce GT 1010 launched at $70 and now averages $70. The GeForce GT 1010 costs 53% less ($79 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 6.7 (Radeon R7 A265) vs 13.9 (GeForce GT 1010) — the GeForce GT 1010 offers 107.5% better value. The GeForce GT 1010 is the newer GPU (2021 vs 2014).
| Feature | Radeon R7 A265 | GeForce GT 1010 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149 | $70-53% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $149 | $70-53% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.7 | 13.9+107% |
| Codename | Opal | GP108 |
| Release | January 9 2014 | January 13 2021 |
| Ranking | #890 | #895 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on Radeon R7 A265 and GeForce GT 1010
