AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
Comparative analysis of AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition and NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 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: 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 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), PassMark - G3D Mark, PassMark - G2D Mark, Geekbench - OpenCL.
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
- Videocard is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 10 month(s) later
- Around 18% higher texture fill rate: 108.8 GTexel / s vs 92.2 billion / sec
- 4.3x more pipelines: 2048 vs 2x 240
- 2.9x better floating-point performance: 3,482 gflops vs 2x 596.2 gflops
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running videocard: 28 nm vs 55 nm
- Around 16% lower typical power consumption: 250 Watt vs 289 Watt
- 2.3x more maximum memory size: 4 GB vs 1792 MB
- 5.5x more memory clock speed: 5448 MHz vs 999 MHz
- 2.3x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 7037 vs 3107
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Launch date | 23 November 2014 vs 8 January 2009 |
| Texture fill rate | 108.8 GTexel / s vs 92.2 billion / sec |
| Pipelines | 2048 vs 2x 240 |
| Floating-point performance | 3,482 gflops vs 2x 596.2 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm vs 55 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 250 Watt vs 289 Watt |
| Maximum memory size | 4 GB vs 1792 MB |
| Memory clock speed | 5448 MHz vs 999 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 7037 vs 3107 |
Reasons to consider the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
- Around 46% higher core clock speed: 1242 MHz vs 850 MHz
- Around 21% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 3443 vs 2852
- 74.8x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 3443 vs 46
- 24.7x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3107 vs 125.7
| Specifications (specs) | |
| Core clock speed | 1242 MHz vs 850 MHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 3443 vs 2852 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 3443 vs 46 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3107 vs 125.7 |
Compare benchmarks
GPU 1: AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition
GPU 2: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 |
|---|---|---|
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 71.778 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1285.141 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 5.839 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 75.347 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 321.767 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2852 | 3443 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 46 | 3443 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 7037 | 3107 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 125.7 | 3107 |
| PassMark - G3D Mark | 1206 | |
| PassMark - G2D Mark | 103 | |
| Geekbench - OpenCL | 21048 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 295 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
| Architecture | GCN 3.0 | Tesla 2.0 |
| Code name | Amethyst | GT200B |
| Launch date | 23 November 2014 | 8 January 2009 |
| Place in performance rating | 927 | 930 |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $500 | |
| Price now | $159.99 | |
| Value for money (0-100) | 8.53 | |
Technical info |
||
| Core clock speed | 850 MHz | 1242 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 3,482 gflops | 2x 596.2 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 55 nm |
| Pipelines | 2048 | 2x 240 |
| Texture fill rate | 108.8 GTexel / s | 92.2 billion / sec |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 250 Watt | 289 Watt |
| Transistor count | 5,000 million | 1,400 million |
| CUDA cores | 480 | |
| CUDA cores per GPU | 240 | |
| Maximum GPU temperature | 105 °C | |
Video outputs and ports |
||
| Display Connectors | No outputs | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, Two Dual Link DVIHDMI |
| Audio input for HDMI | S / PDIF | |
| HDMI | ||
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Multi monitor support | ||
Compatibility, dimensions and requirements |
||
| Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
| SLI options | Quad | |
| Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 8-pin | |
API support |
||
| DirectX | 12.0 (12_0) | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | 2.1 |
Memory |
||
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1792 MB |
| Memory bandwidth | 174.3 GB / s | 223.8 GB / s |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 896 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 5448 MHz | 999 MHz |
| Memory type | GDDR5 | GDDR3 |
| Memory interface width per GPU | 448 Bit | |
| Standard memory config per GPU | 896 MB | |
Technologies |
||
| 3D Vision | ||
| CUDA | ||
| High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | 128bit | |
| SLI | ||
Navigation
Choose a GPU
Compare videocards
Compare AMD Radeon R9 M295X Mac Edition with others
AMDRadeon R9 M295X Mac Edition vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 295
AMDRadeon R9 M295X Mac Edition vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 580M
AMDRadeon R9 M295X Mac Edition vs
AMDRadeon HD 8850M
AMDRadeon R9 M295X Mac Edition vs
NVIDIAGeForce GTX 950A
AMDRadeon R9 M295X Mac Edition vs
NVIDIAGeForce 930A
AMDRadeon R9 M295X Mac Edition vs
AMDRadeon R5 M330
