Radeon 760M vs HD 6930

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 6930 with Radeon 760M, including specs and performance data.

HD 6930
2011
1 GB GDDR5, 186 Watt
7.29

760M outperforms HD 6930 by a whopping 104% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking541356
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.11no data
Power efficiency2.7068.10
ArchitectureTeraScale 3 (2010−2013)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameCaymanHawx Point
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date1 December 2011 (13 years ago)6 December 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$180 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

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 cores1280512
Core clock speed750 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speedno data2599 MHz
Number of transistors2,640 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)186 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate60.0083.17
Floating-point processing power1.92 TFLOPS5.323 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8032
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Length220 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1200 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth153.6 GB/sno data
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, 2x mini-DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.2 (11_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.06.8
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.22.1
VulkanN/A1.3

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

HD 6930 7.29
Radeon 760M 14.84
+104%

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

HD 6930 3826
Radeon 760M 6142
+60.5%

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 HD14−16
−121%
31
+121%
1440p9−10
−111%
19
+111%

Cost per frame, $

1080p12.86no data
1440p20.00no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 25
+0%
25
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+0%
30
+0%
Elden Ring 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 19
+0%
19
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12
+0%
12
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 51
+0%
51
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 18
+0%
18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
+0%
9
+0%
Dota 2 23
+0%
23
+0%
Elden Ring 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 29
+0%
29
+0%
Fortnite 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 44
+0%
44
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 34
+0%
34
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
World of Tanks 190−200
+0%
190−200
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 37
+0%
37
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Valorant 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Elden Ring 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
World of Tanks 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Elden Ring 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Fortnite 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%

This is how HD 6930 and Radeon 760M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 760M is 121% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 760M is 111% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.29 14.84
Recency 1 December 2011 6 December 2023
Chip lithography 40 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 186 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 760M has a 103.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 900% more advanced lithography process, and 1140% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 760M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6930 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 6930 is a desktop card while Radeon 760M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

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.


AMD Radeon HD 6930
Radeon HD 6930
AMD Radeon 760M
Radeon 760M

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.


3.9 66 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6930 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 215 votes

Rate Radeon 760M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.