Radeon HD 6770 vs R9 270X

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270X and Radeon HD 6770, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 270X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 180 Watt
12.62
+290%

R9 270X outperforms HD 6770 by a whopping 290% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking393743
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.640.50
Power efficiency4.892.09
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)TeraScale 2 (2009−2015)
GPU code nameCuracaoJuniper
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferencereference
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)21 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $129

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 270X has 1028% better value for money than HD 6770.

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 cores1280800
Boost clock speed1050 MHz900 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million1,040 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt108 Watt
Texture fill rate84.0034.00
Floating-point processing power2.688 TFLOPS1.36 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8040

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 supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 2.0 x16
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Lengthno data198 mm
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors2 x 6-pin1x 6-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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1050 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s76.8 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 DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 2x mini-DisplayPort
Eyefinity++
HDMI++
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire++
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 11
Shader Model5.15.0
OpenGL4.64.4
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+-

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.

R9 270X 12.62
+290%
HD 6770 3.24

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.

R9 270X 4869
+290%
HD 6770 1250

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.

R9 270X 6560
+332%
HD 6770 1520

Unigine Heaven 4.0

This is an old DirectX 11 benchmark, a newer version of Unigine 3.0 with relatively small differences. It displays a fantasy medieval town sprawling over several flying islands. The benchmark is still sometimes used, despite its significant age, as it was released back in 2013.

R9 270X 735
+202%
HD 6770 243

Gaming performance

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

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+300%
10−11
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+317%
6−7
−317%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+338%
8−9
−338%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+295%
21−24
−295%
Hitman 3 24−27
+300%
6−7
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+313%
16−18
−313%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+320%
10−11
−320%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+338%
8−9
−338%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+294%
18−20
−294%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Battlefield 5 40−45
+300%
10−11
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+317%
6−7
−317%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Far Cry New Dawn 35−40
+338%
8−9
−338%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+295%
21−24
−295%
Hitman 3 24−27
+300%
6−7
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+313%
16−18
−313%
Metro Exodus 40−45
+320%
10−11
−320%
Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+338%
8−9
−338%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+343%
7−8
−343%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+294%
18−20
−294%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 24−27
+317%
6−7
−317%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+314%
7−8
−314%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+295%
21−24
−295%
Hitman 3 24−27
+300%
6−7
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 65−70
+313%
16−18
−313%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 40−45
+310%
10−11
−310%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+343%
7−8
−343%
Watch Dogs: Legion 70−75
+294%
18−20
−294%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 35−40
+338%
8−9
−338%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+317%
6−7
−317%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
+375%
4−5
−375%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Forza Horizon 4 60−65
+343%
14−16
−343%
Hitman 3 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Horizon Zero Dawn 24−27
+333%
6−7
−333%
Metro Exodus 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%
Watch Dogs: Legion 75−80
+339%
18−20
−339%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+320%
5−6
−320%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%
Far Cry New Dawn 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Hitman 3 9−10
+350%
2−3
−350%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+329%
14−16
−329%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
+500%
1−2
−500%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3 0−1
Far Cry 5 7−8
+600%
1−2
−600%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 10−12
+450%
2−3
−450%
Watch Dogs: Legion 5−6
+400%
1−2
−400%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+300%
3−4
−300%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.62 3.24
Recency 8 October 2013 21 January 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 108 Watt

R9 270X has a 289.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

HD 6770, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 270X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 6770 in performance tests.


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 R9 270X
Radeon R9 270X
AMD Radeon HD 6770
Radeon HD 6770

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.


4 741 vote

Rate Radeon R9 270X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 347 votes

Rate Radeon HD 6770 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.