GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 vs Radeon R9 295X2

Intro

Compare those specs to the Radeon R9 295X2, which makes use of a 28 nm design. AMD has set the core frequency at 1018 MHz. The GDDR5 RAM is set to run at a frequency of 1250 MHz on this specific model. It features 2816 SPUs as well as 176 Texture Address Units and 64 Rasterization Operator Units.

Display Graphs

Hide Graphs

Benchmarks

These are real-world performance benchmarks that were submitted by Hardware Compare users. The scores seen here are the average of all benchmarks submitted for each respective test and hardware.

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics Score

Radeon R9 295X2		21205 points
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448		4200 points
	Difference: 17005 (405%)

Power Usage and Theoretical Benchmarks

Power Consumption (Max TDP)

GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448		210 Watts
Radeon R9 295X2		500 Watts
	Difference: 290 Watts (138%)

Memory Bandwidth

Theoretically speaking, the Radeon R9 295X2 is 344% quicker than the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448 in general, because of its greater data rate. (explain)

Radeon R9 295X2		640000 MB/sec
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448		144000 MB/sec
	Difference: 496000 (344%)

Texel Rate

The Radeon R9 295X2 will be much (approximately 774%) better at texture filtering than the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448. (explain)

Radeon R9 295X2		358336 Mtexels/sec
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448		40992 Mtexels/sec
	Difference: 317344 (774%)

Pixel Rate

The Radeon R9 295X2 is quite a bit (more or less 345%) more effective at full screen anti-aliasing than the GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448, and also should be capable of handling higher resolutions while still performing well. (explain)

Radeon R9 295X2		130304 Mpixels/sec
GeForce GTX 560 Ti 448		29280 Mpixels/sec
	Difference: 101024 (345%)

Please note that the above 'benchmarks' are all just theoretical - the results were calculated based on the card's specifications, and real-world performance may (and probably will) vary at least a bit.

One or more cards in this comparison are multi-core. This means that their bandwidth, texel and pixel rates are theoretically doubled - this does not mean the card will actually perform twice as fast, but only that it should in theory be able to. Actual game benchmarks will give a more accurate idea of what it's capable of.

Price Comparison

Specifications

Memory Bandwidth: Bandwidth is the largest amount of information (counted in megabytes per second) that can be transported over the external memory interface within a second. The number is worked out by multiplying the interface width by its memory speed. If it uses DDR type RAM, the result should be multiplied by 2 once again. If DDR5, multiply by 4 instead. The better the memory bandwidth, the better the card will be in general. It especially helps with anti-aliasing, HDR and higher screen resolutions.

Texel Rate: Texel rate is the maximum texture map elements (texels) that can be processed in one second. This is calculated by multiplying the total number of texture units of the card by the core speed of the chip. The better this number, the better the graphics card will be at handling texture filtering (anisotropic filtering - AF). It is measured in millions of texels applied per second.

Pixel Rate: Pixel rate is the maximum amount of pixels the graphics card could possibly record to the local memory per second - measured in millions of pixels per second. The figure is worked out by multiplying the amount of Raster Operations Pipelines by the the card's clock speed. ROPs (Raster Operations Pipelines - aka Render Output Units) are responsible for drawing the pixels (image) on the screen. The actual pixel fill rate also depends on lots of other factors, especially the memory bandwidth - the lower the bandwidth is, the lower the ability to reach the maximum fill rate.