Desktop GPU Performance Hierarchy Table (Archive)

Status
Not open for further replies.

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111
I'll add this from my own testing: 650 Ti 2GB often fails to beat a GTX 460 (the former is at least one level too high IMO), and although a 7970 GHz will easily beat one 580, it's nowhere near as fast as two so I wouldn't say it's on a par with a 590. Kinda need more divisions really in the chart, too many inbetween possibilities, and some cards are not as good as the chart suggests.
 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111


Well spotted. Also, the 380 is too high up, reviews showed it's about the same (plus/minus) as a 960. 380X should be where the 380 is now.

 

CerianK

Distinguished
Nov 7, 2008
249
44
18,720
3
Also missing the GTX 950, which is an important budget-oriented consideration as an alternative for those also looking at GTX 960, R9 380 or R7 370.
 

2Be_or_Not2Be

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2013
990
59
19,440
115
It would be nice to see a separate chart that shows DirectX 12 support. To keep it small for now, only the GPUs that actually support it could be shown, rather than a Y/N field for all of the ones currently on the desktop GPU chart.
 

Kawi6rr

Honorable
Jan 2, 2015
11
0
10,510
0
Quote pulled from your best graphics cards article referring to the AMD R9 390x.
"That’s enough of an improvement to battle Nvidia’s GeForce GTX 980. Except the 980 sells for quite a bit more, leaving AMD to claim our recommendation for 2560x1440 in the latest games with detail settings maxed out."
 

mapesdhs

Distinguished
Jan 22, 2007
2,507
0
21,160
111


toms' review showed it to be significantly slower than a 980 (by that I mean a bigger difference than many of the gaps used in the above chart) in just about every case for HD and 1440p, only edging ahead in some cases at 4K (though the frame rates were kinda naff at that high a res), and of course using far more power. Biggest difference was for ACU. See:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-radeon-r9-390x-r9-380-r7-370,review-33233-6.html
http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/amd-radeon-r9-390x-r9-380-r7-370,review-33233-9.html

 


Ha! I'm running a 7950 in this machine and a 77nn (7750?) in my family 'puter. Will last me a few more years, I'm hoping.

I'm waiting for the G-sync vs Freesync thing to shake out, I don't want to own a betamax monitor or GPU. :)

 

Adi88

Honorable
Aug 22, 2014
21
0
10,510
0
Can't wait to see the difference when I finally get a new system in 2016. Moving on from my 9600GT will make a world of difference. I'm hoping to jump up up 13 or 14 tiers to a 980 or 980Ti.
 

Achoo22

Distinguished
Aug 23, 2011
350
2
18,780
0
This chart is solid gold, especially with AMD re-re-re-releasing all their cards over and over with different names and price points. Even a techie can forget that a $350 7870 is exactly equal to a $130 r7 265.
 

Tony-Jones101

Reputable
Dec 16, 2015
1
0
4,510
0
These guys are missing out on a great card in there line up. the R9 270.. pisses on the R7 360 and you can get the 270 for around 90 quid. Lets me run Bf4 maxed out with X2 anti aliasing no AO. gets me around 35 fps but if i lower a few notches on hungry sliders/fx then gets me 40 odd to 50, why anybody needs 100 fps i dont know. for the price of some of these cards you can get 2 R9 270's and run them in xfire and your on 100 fps all on ULTRA in Bf4, if you need 100 fps that is. I do wonder does fps affect you bullet impact speed ? o yea before i got the R9 270 i went with the R7 250 and it was terrible. not much better than the HD 5450 and thats a 20 quid card. I sent it back and went with the R9, Great decision.
 
G

Guest

Guest
@Tomy-Jones101, r9 270's in 2-way xfire will definitely triple the fps, possibly beat my GTX 980 and work well on every game :pt1cable:
 

ErikVinoya

Honorable
May 11, 2014
202
0
10,710
21
This may be the case with Windows 7 and 8, but things switch around a bit in Windows 10 thanks to Nvidia botching their support for certain features in DX12.
Still too early to jump to conclusions with DX12. NVidia doesn't have proper async compute, but AMD doesn't have Conservative Raster. We still need more benchmark tools and games to test before saying X is better than Y.
 

Mike Stewart

Honorable
Jun 12, 2013
55
0
10,640
3
There are so many cards that are MISSING from the chart !
Now where is 250X, 380X , 950 !!!! what is this>???
Tomshardware can you please do your job properly !?
 

caiokn

Reputable
Jun 18, 2014
62
0
4,640
1
Nice to see an updated list, however I think the R7 360 should be one tier higher. From what I've seen, that card is a good match for the GTX 750, which is already more powerful than the GTX 650 Ti. Also, the HD 7790 should be one tier higher too, as it performs just like a R7 260x (but usually has just 1 GB Vram).

It kinda surprised me that the Intel HD Graphics 530 is just as powerful as a R7 250. Hope AMD can offer an even better integrated GPU solution with their upcoming APUs.
 

rob212

Distinguished
Sep 17, 2009
8
0
18,510
0
Can you add the Skylake GPUs to the Intel column for comparison? I'd like to see where the 500 series Iris and HD units rank.
 
Really strange the GTX 950 is missing when you done recent bench test on it.

Also I hate the fact there is now a 4"x4" box with some stupid add in the bottom left of my screen I can't get rid of. The right 3rd of the screen covered with adds when is enough enough? Toms has gone to commercial it is very sad.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS