AMD Radeon HD 7970M vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a clear picture: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN takes the sole head-to-head victory, and it does so decisively. In the only directly comparable test, Geekbench OpenCL, the TITAN posts a score of 24873 against the AMD Radeon HD 7970M's 17019, a margin of 31.6%. This is not a narrow win; it is a substantial gap that indicates the TITAN holds a commanding lead in raw compute throughput as measured by this workload.

However, the AMD Radeon HD 7970M is not without its own merits, though they manifest differently. Its average benchmark score of 17019 places it in the 60th percentile of all GPUs in the database, which is higher than the TITAN's 56th percentile. This is a curious inversion: the TITAN wins the head-to-head, but the HD 7970M sits higher in the overall distribution. The reason becomes clear when looking at the rivals. The HD 7970M's nearest competitors are the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17037, a 0.1% difference), the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (17083, a 0.4% difference), and the NVIDIA Tesla M4 (16932, a 0.5% difference). These are all desktop or workstation-class parts, and the HD 7970M hangs right with them. Meanwhile, the TITAN's nearest rivals include the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14385, a 0.1% difference) and the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics (14315, a 0.4% difference), which are integrated or low-power mobile solutions. The TITAN's average score of 14373 is dragged down by its participation in other benchmark suites (Metal, Vulkan) where it scores 8218 and 10027 respectively, whereas the HD 7970M only has the one OpenCL result.

So where does each win? The TITAN wins on peak performance in a single, demanding compute test. The HD 7970M wins on consistency and relative standing among its peers, at least according to the aggregate database percentile. The data suggests the TITAN is a high-ceiling part with variable results across different APIs, while the HD 7970M is a more uniform performer, though at a lower absolute level. For a user prioritizing raw OpenCL compute, the TITAN is the clear choice. For a user looking at overall database standing, the HD 7970M appears more favorably positioned relative to the field.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two GPUs is stark, and it explains the benchmark results. The AMD Radeon HD 7970M is built on the GCN 1.0 architecture, using the Wimbledon chip. It is a 28 nm part fabricated by TSMC, with 2,800 million transistors packed into a 212 mm² die, yielding a transistor density of 13.2 million per square millimeter. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN, by contrast, uses the Kepler architecture with the GK110 chip. It is also 28 nm and fabricated by TSMC, but it is a far larger chip: 7,080 million transistors on a 561 mm² die, giving a slightly lower density of 12.6 million per square millimeter. The TITAN's chip is physically massive, more than 2.5 times the transistor count and nearly 2.7 times the die area of the HD 7970M.

Beyond the raw silicon, the memory subsystems diverge significantly. The HD 7970M has 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus, delivering 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth, with memory clocked at 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective). The TITAN offers 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, with a much higher memory clock of 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective), resulting in 288.4 GB/s of bandwidth, nearly double that of the AMD part. The TITAN also has a wider memory interface and more capacity, which matters for large datasets and high-resolution textures.

The compute resources tell a similar story. The HD 7970M has 1280 shading units, 80 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. The TITAN has 2688 shading units, 224 TMUs, and 48 ROPs. That is more than double the shading units and nearly triple the texture units. Consequently, the TITAN's pixel rate is 49.06 GPixel/s versus 27.20 GPixel/s for the HD 7970M, and its texture rate is 196.2 GTexel/s versus 68.00 GTexel/s. Floating-point performance follows suit: the TITAN delivers 4.709 TFLOPS of FP32 compute, while the HD 7970M manages 2.176 TFLOPS. None of the cards have dedicated RT or tensor cores, as both predate those features.

Power and physical design also differ. The HD 7970M is a 100 W part in an MXM module, with no power connectors (portable device dependent), and it uses an MXM-B (3.0) bus interface. The TITAN is a 250 W dual-slot card, requiring 1x 6-pin and 1x 8-pin power connectors, with a suggested PSU of 600 W, and it connects via PCIe 3.0 x16. The TITAN has a physical presence: 267 mm long, 111 mm tall, and 38 mm wide, while the HD 7970M is designed for laptops or compact systems. API support is close: both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan, but the HD 7970M supports DirectX 12 (11_1) while the TITAN supports DirectX 12 (11_0), a slight difference in feature level. The TITAN's Vulkan version is newer (1.2.175 versus 1.2.170).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The only direct head-to-head test in the database is Geekbench OpenCL, and the result is unambiguous. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN scores 24873, while the AMD Radeon HD 7970M scores 17019. The delta is 31.6% in favor of the TITAN. This is the largest win recorded between the two, and it aligns with the architectural differences. The TITAN's 2688 shading units and 224 TMUs, combined with 288.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth, are simply more capable of feeding and executing a compute-heavy OpenCL workload than the HD 7970M's 1280 shading units and 80 TMUs with 153.6 GB/s.

To put the HD 7970M's score in context, it is within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17037) and within 0.4% of the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (17083). That means the HD 7970M is comparable to a dual-GPU flagship and a modern midrange card in this specific test, which is impressive for a mobile part. The TITAN, on the other hand, sits 0.1% above the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14385) in its average score, but that average includes its weaker Metal and Vulkan results. In OpenCL alone, the TITAN is far ahead of those rivals.

The data shows a single, dominant win for the TITAN, with a 31.6% lead. The HD 7970M has no wins in the head-to-head comparison. That said, the HD 7970M's single score is its average, and it is a consistent performer. The TITAN's OpenCL result is its best of three benchmarks, showing it excels in that API but is less impressive in Metal (8218) and Vulkan (10027). This suggests the TITAN's architecture is highly optimized for OpenCL, which may reflect its compute-oriented design. The HD 7970M, with only one benchmark recorded, does not show such variance; it is what it is.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the only head-to-head benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN wins Geekbench OpenCL with a score of 24873, while the AMD Radeon HD 7970M scores 17019, a 31.6% difference in favor of the TITAN.

Q: How does the AMD Radeon HD 7970M compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The HD 7970M (17019) is within 0.1% of the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 690 (17037), 0.4% below the AMD Radeon RX 7600 XT (17083), and 0.5% above the NVIDIA Tesla M4 (16932). It sits in the 60th percentile of all GPUs.

Q: What is the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN's average score, and how does that compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The TITAN's average benchmark score is 14373, which is 0.1% below the AMD Radeon RX Vega 11 (14385), 0.1% above the AMD Radeon Vega 11 (14352), 0.2% below the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 965M (14404), and 0.4% above the Intel Iris Xe MAX Graphics (14315). It sits in the 56th percentile.

Q: Does the AMD Radeon HD 7970M have a higher or lower transistor density than the GTX TITAN?

A: The HD 7970M has a higher transistor density at 13.2 million per square millimeter, compared to the TITAN's 12.6 million per square millimeter, despite the TITAN having far more total transistors (7,080 million versus 2,800 million).

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures for each card?

A: The AMD Radeon HD 7970M has 153.6 GB/s of bandwidth from 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN has 288.4 GB/s from 6 GB of GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus, nearly double the bandwidth.

Q: Which GPU has a higher pixel rate and texture rate?

A: The GTX TITAN has a pixel rate of 49.06 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 196.2 GTexel/s. The HD 7970M has a pixel rate of 27.20 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 68.00 GTexel/s. The TITAN leads in both metrics.

The Verdict

Based strictly on the recorded data, the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN is the superior performer in the one benchmark that directly compares the two. Its 24873 OpenCL score versus 17019 for the AMD Radeon HD 7970M is a 31.6% advantage, and this aligns with its larger silicon: more shading units (2688 versus 1280), more TMUs (224 versus 80), more ROPs (48 versus 32), and double the memory bandwidth (288.4 GB/s versus 153.6 GB/s). The TITAN also offers 6 GB of memory versus 2 GB, which is a practical advantage for larger workloads.

However, the HD 7970M is not without a case. Its average benchmark score of 17019 places it in the 60th percentile, above the TITAN's 56th percentile. This is because the TITAN's average is pulled down by its lower Metal (8218) and Vulkan (10027) scores, which are not present for the HD 7970M. If the database only recorded OpenCL for both, the TITAN would dominate. But the aggregate standing suggests the HD 7970M is more consistently competitive relative to the broader GPU landscape, while the TITAN is specialized.

Who should pick which? A user who prioritizes OpenCL compute performance, has a desktop with a 600 W PSU, and needs 6 GB of memory should choose the GTX TITAN. It is a high-power, dual-slot card with clear performance advantages. A user who needs a mobile or compact solution, runs at 100 W with no external power connectors, and cares more about percentile standing across a variety of workloads might prefer the HD 7970M, though they would sacrifice raw performance. The data does not support the HD 7970M as a faster card; it supports it as a more efficient and consistently ranked one relative to its peers.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Radeon HD 7970M | NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN |

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

| Chip | Wimbledon | GK110 |

| Architecture | GCN 1.0 | Kepler |

| Transistors | 2,800 million | 7,080 million |

| Die Size | 212 mm² | 561 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 13.2M / mm² | 12.6M / mm² |

| Base Clock | Not specified | 836 MHz |

| Boost Clock | Not specified | 876 MHz |

| Memory Clock | 1200 MHz (4.8 Gbps effective) | 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | 6 GB |

| Memory Bus Width | 256 bit | 384 bit |

| Memory Bandwidth | 153.6 GB/s | 288.4 GB/s |

| Shading Units | 1280 | 2688 |

| TMUs | 80 | 224 |

| ROPs | 32 | 48 |

| Pixel Rate | 27.20 GPixel/s | 49.06 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 68.00 GTexel/s | 196.2 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 2.176 TFLOPS | 4.709 TFLOPS |

| TDP | 100 W | 250 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | Dual-slot |

| Power Connectors | None | 1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin |

| Suggested PSU | Not specified | 600 W |

| Bus Interface | MXM-B (3.0) | PCIe 3.0 x16 |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, 1x DisplayPort 1.2 |

| DirectX | 12 (11_1) | 12 (11_0) |

| Vulkan | 1.2.170 | 1.2.175 |

| Dimensions | Not specified | 267 mm x 111 mm x 38 mm |

| Release Date | 2012-04-23 | 2013-02-18 |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | 999 USD |