AMD Radeon 540 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct benchmark comparisons between the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 and the AMD Radeon 540. The first is Geekbench OpenCL, where the GTX 960 scores 18,925 against the Radeon 540's 6,184. That is a 206% advantage for the NVIDIA card, meaning it delivers roughly three times the raw compute throughput in this API. This is the single largest margin in either card's recorded head-to-head results, and it sets the tone for the rest of the analysis.

The second comparison is Geekbench Vulkan, and here the gap shrinks dramatically. The GTX 960 scores 9,231 while the Radeon 540 scores 9,162, a difference of only 0.8%. In practical terms, these two cards are effectively tied in Vulkan workloads. The NVIDIA part still wins, but by a margin so thin that it falls within typical run-to-run variance. This is a notable result because it shows the Radeon 540 can hold its own in a modern low-level graphics API, despite being vastly outclassed in OpenCL compute.

Looking at the overall benchmark averages, the GTX 960 records an average score of 9,273 across all tests, placing it at the 45th percentile of all GPUs in the database. The Radeon 540 averages 7,673, sitting at the 41st percentile. That is a raw performance gap of roughly 21% in favor of the GTX 960, but the distribution of that gap is uneven: the OpenCL test accounts for almost all of it, while the Vulkan test shows near-parity.

The nearest rival data helps contextualize both cards. The GTX 960's closest competitors by average score include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (9,294, 0.2% higher), the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (9,302, 0.3% higher), the AMD Radeon R7 M380 (9,313, 0.4% higher), and the AMD Radeon Vega 8 (9,221, 0.6% lower). The GTX 960 sits squarely in a cluster of mid-range parts from the 2014-2016 era, with no single rival more than 0.6% away. The Radeon 540, by contrast, has a more spread-out rival set: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti sits 0.6% higher at 7,723, the AMD Radeon Pro WX 3100 is 1.2% higher at 7,580, the AMD Radeon R7 250 is 1.5% higher at 7,557, and the Intel Arc A310 is 1.6% higher at 7,550. The Radeon 540 is the weakest of that group, but only by a small margin.

Architecture Differences

The two cards come from different architectural generations and different foundries. The GTX 960 uses the GM206 chip built on NVIDIA's Maxwell 2.0 architecture, fabricated on a 28 nm process at TSMC. It packs 2,940 million transistors into a 228 mm² die, giving a transistor density of 12.9 million per square millimeter. The Radeon 540 uses the Lexa chip based on AMD's GCN 4.0 architecture, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains 2,200 million transistors on a 103 mm² die, for a density of 21.4 million per square millimeter. The smaller, denser process node gives the Radeon 540 a manufacturing advantage, but that does not translate into a performance advantage in the recorded data.

The compute resources differ substantially. The GTX 960 has 1,024 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 32 render output units. The Radeon 540 has 384 shading units, 24 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This is a 2.7x difference in shader count, a 2.7x difference in TMUs, and a 2x difference in ROPs, all favoring the NVIDIA card. The pixel rate reflects this: the GTX 960 reaches 37.70 GPixel/s against the Radeon 540's 18.93 GPixel/s. Texture rate is 75.39 GTexel/s versus 28.39 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance (FP32) is 2.413 TFLOPS for the GTX 960 and 908.5 GFLOPS for the Radeon 540. Notably, the Radeon 540 does offer FP16 at 908.5 GFLOPS with a 1:1 ratio, while the GTX 960 has no recorded FP16 figure, but this does not appear to help it in the benchmark results.

Memory configuration is another major divergence. The GTX 960 uses 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 112.2 GB/s of bandwidth at 1753 MHz (7 Gbps effective). The Radeon 540 uses only 1 GB of GDDR5 on a 32-bit bus, delivering 24.00 GB/s at 1500 MHz (6 Gbps effective). That is a 4.7x advantage in memory bandwidth for the GTX 960, which is likely a decisive factor in its OpenCL dominance. The Radeon 540's narrow memory bus severely limits its ability to feed its compute units, even though the 14 nm node and GCN 4.0 architecture bring modern features like DisplayPort 1.4a output.

Power and physical design also differ. The GTX 960 has a 120 W TDP, requires a dual-slot cooler, and needs a single 6-pin power connector with a 300 W suggested PSU. The Radeon 540 has a 50 W TDP, fits in a single slot, requires no power connectors, and runs on a 250 W suggested PSU. The Radeon 540 also uses a PCIe 3.0 x8 interface, while the GTX 960 uses the full PCIe 3.0 x16. The GTX 960 supports DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.4, while the Radeon 540 supports DirectX 12 (12_0) and Vulkan 1.3. Both support OpenGL 4.6.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 960 wins decisively in raw compute and memory bandwidth. Its 206% lead in Geekbench OpenCL is the kind of margin that shows up in GPU-accelerated productivity tasks like video encoding, physics simulation, or any OpenCL-based renderer. The 2x advantage in ROPs and 4.7x advantage in memory bandwidth also suggest it will handle higher resolutions and texture-heavy workloads better, even though the recorded benchmarks do not directly test those scenarios. The 2 GB frame buffer, while small by modern standards, is double the Radeon 540's 1 GB, which matters for games or applications that exceed the 1 GB limit.

The Radeon 540's only recorded win is not a win at all, but a near-tie. In Geekbench Vulkan, it trails by just 0.8%, and given that the GTX 960's nearest rivals in the database are within 0.6% of its average score, this is a statistical dead heat. This suggests that in Vulkan-based games or applications, the Radeon 540's GCN 4.0 architecture holds up better than its compute resources would imply. The 14 nm process and 1:1 FP16 support may also give it an edge in workloads that can use half-precision math, though the database does not record any FP16-specific benchmarks.

For systems with strict power or space limits, the Radeon 540 has a clear practical advantage. Its 50 W TDP means no power connector is needed, and a single-slot design fits in compact cases. The GTX 960 requires a 6-pin connector, a dual-slot cooler, and a 300 W PSU. If the goal is to add a discrete GPU to an older office PC with a weak power supply, the Radeon 540 is far easier to install. But that is a physical constraint advantage, not a performance one.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the GTX 960 is the faster card by a wide margin in most workloads, but the Radeon 540 is not without its niche. If you need compute performance, the GTX 960 is the only choice. Its 206% OpenCL lead and 2.5x higher average benchmark score (9,273 vs 7,673) are not close calls. The 45th percentile ranking versus the 41st percentile also reflects a higher position in the overall GPU landscape.

However, if your primary use case is Vulkan-based gaming or applications, the benchmark results indicate the Radeon 540 is surprisingly competitive. A 0.8% deficit is negligible in real-world terms, and the Radeon 540 does this while drawing less than half the power and fitting in a single slot. For a low-power HTPC or a secondary machine where space and heat are critical, the Radeon 540's 50 W TDP and connector-free design are compelling.

The GTX 960 is end-of-life, as is the Radeon 540. The GTX 960 launched in January 2015 with a launch MSRP of 199 USD. The Radeon 540 launched in April 2017 with no recorded MSRP. Neither card is a modern purchase, but among used or surplus parts, the GTX 960 offers far more performance for systems that can accommodate its power and size requirements. The Radeon 540 is the right pick only when power draw, slot width, or PSU capacity are the limiting factors, and even then, its 1 GB memory and 24 GB/s bandwidth will cap its usefulness.

FAQ

Q: Which card is faster in OpenCL?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 scores 18,925 in Geekbench OpenCL, which is 206% higher than the AMD Radeon 540's 6,184. This is the largest performance gap in the recorded data.

Q: Is the Radeon 540 competitive in Vulkan?

A: Yes, nearly so. In Geekbench Vulkan, the GTX 960 scores 9,231 and the Radeon 540 scores 9,162, a difference of only 0.8%. This is within noise and effectively a tie.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The GTX 960 has 112.2 GB/s of bandwidth from its 128-bit GDDR5 bus, while the Radeon 540 has 24.00 GB/s from a 32-bit bus. That is a 4.7x advantage for the NVIDIA card.

Q: Does the Radeon 540 require a power connector?

A: No. The Radeon 540 has a 50 W TDP and uses no power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 250 W. The GTX 960 needs a single 6-pin connector and a 300 W PSU.

Q: How do these cards rank against all GPUs in the database?

A: The GTX 960 sits at the 45th percentile with an average benchmark score of 9,273. The Radeon 540 is at the 41st percentile with an average score of 7,673.

Q: What are the closest rivals to each card?

A: The GTX 960's nearest rival is the AMD Radeon Vega 8, which scores 0.6% lower. The Radeon 540's nearest rival is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1660 Ti, which scores 0.6% higher.

Specification Differences

| Specification | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960 | AMD Radeon 540 |

|----------------|------------------------|-----------------|

| Architecture | Maxwell 2.0 | GCN 4.0 |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 14 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 2,940 million | 2,200 million |

| Die Size | 228 mm² | 103 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 12.9M / mm² | 21.4M / mm² |

| Shading Units | 1024 | 384 |

| TMUs | 64 | 24 |

| ROPs | 32 | 16 |

| Pixel Rate | 37.70 GPixel/s | 18.93 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 75.39 GTexel/s | 28.39 GTexel/s |

| FP32 Performance | 2.413 TFLOPS | 908.5 GFLOPS |

| FP16 Performance | Not recorded | 908.5 GFLOPS (1:1) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 1024 MB |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |

| Memory Bus | 128 bit | 32 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 112.2 GB/s | 24.00 GB/s |

| Memory Clock | 1753 MHz, 7 Gbps effective | 1500 MHz, 6 Gbps effective |

| TDP | 120 W | 50 W |

| Slot Width | Dual-slot | Single-slot |

| Power Connectors | 1x 6-pin | None |

| Suggested PSU | 300 W | 250 W |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x8 |

| Display Outputs | 1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.2 | 2x DisplayPort 1.4a |

| DirectX Support | 12 (12_1) | 12 (12_0) |

| Vulkan Support | 1.4 | 1.3 |

| Release Date | 2015-01-21 | 2017-04-19 |