GeForce GTX 760A vs GTX 760M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 760M and GeForce GTX 760A, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 760M
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 55 Watt
4.52
+41.7%

GTX 760M outperforms GTX 760A by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking670759
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency5.633.97
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameGK106GK106
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date30 May 2013 (11 years ago)17 March 2014 (10 years ago)

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 cores768768
Core clock speed657 MHz628 MHz
Boost clock speed657 MHz657 MHz
Number of transistors2,540 million2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate42.0542.05
Floating-point processing power1.009 TFLOPS1.009 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs6464

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).

Laptop sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount2 GB2 GB
Standard memory configurationGDDR5no data
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed2000 MHz1002 MHz
Memory bandwidth64.0 GB/s64.13 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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
eDP 1.2 signal supportUp to 3840x2160no data
LVDS signal supportUp to 1920x1200no data
VGA аnalog display supportUp to 2048x1536no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportUp to 3840x2160no data
HDMI+-
HDCP content protection+-
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI+-
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming+-

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

Blu-Ray 3D Support+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
3D Vision / 3DTV Play+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 API12 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.11.2
Vulkan1.1.1261.1.126
CUDA+3.0

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 760M 4.52
+41.7%
GTX 760A 3.19

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 760M 1736
+41.6%
GTX 760A 1226

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:

900p39
+44.4%
27−30
−44.4%
Full HD46
+53.3%
30−35
−53.3%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Fortnite 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Valorant 55−60
+60%
35−40
−60%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Battlefield 5 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 98
+50.8%
65−70
−50.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Dota 2 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Fortnite 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Valorant 55−60
+60%
35−40
−60%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Counter-Strike 2 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
Dota 2 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Far Cry 5 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 5 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+50%
8−9
−50%
Valorant 55−60
+60%
35−40
−60%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+50%
16−18
−50%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 30−35
+47.6%
21−24
−47.6%
Valorant 45−50
+53.3%
30−33
−53.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+75%
4−5
−75%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Grand Theft Auto V 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Valorant 21−24
+50%
14−16
−50%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Dota 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%
Far Cry 5 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%

This is how GTX 760M and GTX 760A compete in popular games:

  • GTX 760M is 44% faster in 900p
  • GTX 760M is 53% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.52 3.19
Recency 30 May 2013 17 March 2014

GTX 760M has a 41.7% higher aggregate performance score.

GTX 760A, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 9 months.

The GeForce GTX 760M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 760A 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 760M
GeForce GTX 760M
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760A
GeForce GTX 760A

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.


3.7 105 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 26 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 760M or GeForce GTX 760A, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.