AMD Radeon R9 270X vs NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 270X and NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX videocards for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Technical info, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions and requirements, API support, Memory, Technologies. Benchmark videocards performance analysis: PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 270X
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 6 month(s) later
- Around 94% higher texture fill rate: 84 GTexel / s vs 43.2 billion / sec
- 10x more pipelines: 1280 vs 128
- 6.2x better floating-point performance: 2,688 gflops vs 432.1 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 65 nm
- 4x more maximum memory size: 2 GB vs 512 MB
- 6.3x better performance in PassMark - G3D Mark: 4869 vs 769
- Around 67% better performance in PassMark - G2D Mark: 613 vs 366
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 8 October 2013 vs 28 March 2008 |
| Texture fill rate | 84 GTexel / s vs 43.2 billion / sec |
| Pipelines | 1280 vs 128 |
| Floating-point performance | 2,688 gflops vs 432.1 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 65 nm |
| Maximum memory size | 2 GB vs 512 MB |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4869 vs 769 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 613 vs 366 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX
- Around 29% lower typical power consumption: 140 Watt vs 180 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 140 Watt vs 180 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 270X
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX
| PassMark - G3D Mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - G2D Mark |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R9 270X | NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 4869 | 769 |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 613 | 366 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 63.87 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1314.72 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 6.354 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 85.21 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 315.412 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 8068 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3706 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3350 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 8068 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3706 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3350 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Graphics Score | 1772 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R9 270X | NVIDIA GeForce 9800 GTX | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Tesla |
| Code name | Curacao | G92 |
| Design | AMD Radeon R9 200 Series | |
| Launch date | 8 October 2013 | 28 March 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | $299 |
| Place in performance rating | 440 | 438 |
| Price now | $399 | |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Value for money (0-100) | 16.05 | |
Technical info |
||
| Boost clock speed | 1050 MHz | |
| Floating-point performance | 2,688 gflops | 432.1 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 65 nm |
| Pipelines | 1280 | 128 |
| Stream Processors | 1280 | |
| Texture fill rate | 84 GTexel / s | 43.2 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 180 Watt | 140 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2,800 million | 754 million |
| Core clock speed | 1688 MHz | |
| CUDA cores | 128 | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort | 2x DVI, 1x S-Video, HDTVDual Link DVI |
| DisplayPort support | ||
| Dual-link DVI support | ||
| Eyefinity | ||
| HDMI | ||
| VGA | ||
| Audio input for HDMI | S / PDIF | |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 | PCI-E 2.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 2 x 6-pin | 2x 6-pin |
| Height | 4.376" (11.1 cm) | |
| Length | 10.5" (26.7 cm) | |
| SLI options | 2-way3-way | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12 | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | ||
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | 512 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 179.2 GB/s | 70.4 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 256 Bit |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Shared memory | 0 | |
| Memory clock speed | 1100 MHz | |
Technologies |
||
| AMD Eyefinity | ||
| AppAcceleration | ||
| CrossFire | ||
| DDMA audio | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| HD3D | ||
| LiquidVR | ||
| TressFX | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| SLI | ||