Radeon RX 7800 XT vs GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM and Radeon RX 7800 XT, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 760 Ti OEM
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 170 Watt
13.94

RX 7800 XT outperforms GTX 760 Ti OEM by a whopping 345% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking37733
Place by popularitynot in top-10066
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data67.93
Power efficiency5.7216.46
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)
GPU code nameGK104Navi 32
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date27 September 2013 (11 years ago)25 August 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores13443840
Core clock speed915 MHz1295 MHz
Boost clock speed980 MHz2430 MHz
Number of transistors3,540 million28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)170 Watt263 Watt
Texture fill rate109.8583.2
Floating-point processing power2.634 TFLOPS37.32 TFLOPS
ROPs3296
TMUs112240
Ray Tracing Coresno data60

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x16
Length241 mm267 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin2x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB16 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1502 MHz2438 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.3 GB/s624.1 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x HDMI 2.1a, 3x DisplayPort 2.1
HDMI++

API and SDK compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.3
CUDA3.0-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score.

GTX 760 Ti OEM 13.94
RX 7800 XT 62.10
+345%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 760 Ti OEM 5427
RX 7800 XT 24183
+346%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD45−50
−380%
216
+380%
1440p27−30
−359%
124
+359%
4K14−16
−407%
71
+407%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data2.31
1440pno data4.02
4Kno data7.03

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 324
+0%
324
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 241
+0%
241
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 248
+0%
248
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 243
+0%
243
+0%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 200
+0%
200
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 196
+0%
196
+0%
Far Cry 5 204
+0%
204
+0%
Fortnite 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 278
+0%
278
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 276
+0%
276
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 145
+0%
145
+0%
Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 163
+0%
163
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+0%
270−280
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 163
+0%
163
+0%
Far Cry 5 196
+0%
196
+0%
Fortnite 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 261
+0%
261
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 256
+0%
256
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 178
+0%
178
+0%
Metro Exodus 172
+0%
172
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 366
+0%
366
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 160−170
+0%
160−170
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 149
+0%
149
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 150
+0%
150
+0%
Far Cry 5 182
+0%
182
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 222
+0%
222
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 200
+0%
200
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 260−270
+0%
260−270
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 400−450
+0%
400−450
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 140
+0%
140
+0%
Metro Exodus 106
+0%
106
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+0%
170−180
+0%
Valorant 350−400
+0%
350−400
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 99
+0%
99
+0%
Far Cry 5 176
+0%
176
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 202
+0%
202
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 147
+0%
147
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 152
+0%
152
+0%
Metro Exodus 63
+0%
63
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 118
+0%
118
+0%
Valorant 300−350
+0%
300−350
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 21
+0%
21
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 45
+0%
45
+0%
Far Cry 5 104
+0%
104
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 164
+0%
164
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 95−100
+0%
95−100
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

This is how GTX 760 Ti OEM and RX 7800 XT compete in popular games:

  • RX 7800 XT is 380% faster in 1080p
  • RX 7800 XT is 359% faster in 1440p
  • RX 7800 XT is 407% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 61 test (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 13.94 62.10
Recency 27 September 2013 25 August 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 170 Watt 263 Watt

GTX 760 Ti OEM has 54.7% lower power consumption.

RX 7800 XT, on the other hand, has a 345.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 7800 XT is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM
GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM
AMD Radeon RX 7800 XT
Radeon RX 7800 XT

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.6 84 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 3374 votes

Rate Radeon RX 7800 XT on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 760 Ti OEM or Radeon RX 7800 XT, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.