GeForce GTX 760 vs Radeon Pro Vega 64

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon Pro Vega 64 with GeForce GTX 760, including specs and performance data.

Pro Vega 64
2017
16 GB HBM2, 250 Watt
33.49
+170%

Pro Vega 64 outperforms GTX 760 by a whopping 170% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking156397
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data4.49
Power efficiency9.345.09
ArchitectureGCN 5.0 (2017−2020)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameVega 10GK104
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date27 June 2017 (7 years ago)25 June 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$249

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 cores40961152
Core clock speed1250 MHz980 MHz
Boost clock speed1350 MHz1033 MHz
Number of transistors12,500 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology14 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt170 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data97 °C
Texture fill rate345.699.07
Floating-point processing power11.06 TFLOPS2.378 TFLOPS
ROPs6432
TMUs25696

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).

Bus supportno dataPCI Express 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm241 mm
Heightno data4.376" (11.1 cm)
WidthIGP2-slot
Minimum recommended system powerno data500 Watt
Supplementary power connectorsNone2x 6-pin
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 typeHBM2GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount16 GB2 GB
Memory bus width2048 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed786 MHz1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth402.4 GB/s192.2 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 outputsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort
Multi monitor supportno data4 displays
HDMI-+
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

Supported technologies

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

Blu Ray 3D-+
3D Gaming-+
3D Vision-+
PhysX-+
3D Vision Live-+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 (11_0)
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.64.3
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan1.1.1251.1.126
CUDA-+

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.

Pro Vega 64 33.49
+170%
GTX 760 12.42

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.

Pro Vega 64 12920
+170%
GTX 760 4792

GeekBench 5 OpenCL

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses OpenCL API by Khronos Group.

Pro Vega 64 71320
+398%
GTX 760 14307

GeekBench 5 Vulkan

Geekbench 5 is a widespread graphics card benchmark combined from 11 different test scenarios. All these scenarios rely on direct usage of GPU's processing power, no 3D rendering is involved. This variation uses Vulkan API by AMD & Khronos Group.

Pro Vega 64 73608
+436%
GTX 760 13739

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 HD180−190
+161%
69
−161%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data3.61

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+0%
80−85
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hitman 3 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%

This is how Pro Vega 64 and GTX 760 compete in popular games:

  • Pro Vega 64 is 161% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 33.49 12.42
Recency 27 June 2017 25 June 2013
Maximum RAM amount 16 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 170 Watt

Pro Vega 64 has a 169.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 760, on the other hand, has 47.1% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Pro Vega 64 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 760 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon Pro Vega 64 is a workstation graphics card while GeForce GTX 760 is a desktop 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 Pro Vega 64
Radeon Pro Vega 64
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760
GeForce GTX 760

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.3 19 votes

Rate Radeon Pro Vega 64 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 2088 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 760 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.