AMD Radeon R7 Graphics vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M Comparison

# The Verdict

The data presents a split decision: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M dominates in OpenCL compute workloads, while the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics counters with a decisive Vulkan advantage. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 760M scores 5,604 against the R7's 4,015 — a 39.6% lead that reflects its larger shading-unit count and dedicated memory interface. However, the Vulkan test flips the script: the R7 scores 5,980 versus 4,868 for the GTX 760M, an 18.6% margin in AMD's favor. With one win apiece, neither GPU claims overall supremacy.

For users prioritizing OpenCL-accelerated compute — think productivity applications that leverage general-purpose GPU processing — the GTX 760M is the clear choice. Its 768 shading units, 64 texture mapping units, and 64.13 GB/s of dedicated GDDR5 bandwidth provide a structural advantage that the R7's 384 shading units and system-shared memory cannot match. Conversely, the R7's Vulkan performance suggests a better fit for modern graphics APIs and gaming workloads that exploit low-level hardware access.

The percentile data reinforces this split: the GTX 760M sits at the 31st percentile of all GPUs with an average benchmark score of 5,236, while the R7 ranks at the 29th percentile with a 4,998 average. The 4.8% gap in average scores is modest, yet the underlying benchmark distribution tells a more nuanced story. The GTX 760M's nearest rival, the GeForce 940M, scores 5,284 (-0.9% delta), while the R7's closest competitor, the Radeon R5 M430, scores 5,018 (-0.4% delta) — both GPUs hover near their respective peer groups.

# Architecture Differences

The two GPUs represent fundamentally different design philosophies. The GTX 760M uses NVIDIA's Kepler architecture on the GK106S chip, fabricated on TSMC's 28 nm process. The R7 Graphics employs AMD's GCN 2.0 architecture with the Spectre Lite chip, also on 28 nm but through GlobalFoundries. Both chips integrate roughly similar transistor counts — 2,540 million for NVIDIA versus 2,410 million for AMD — yet the die sizes diverge: the GTX 760M measures 221 mm² versus the R7's 245 mm². This yields a higher transistor density for NVIDIA at 11.5M per mm² compared to AMD's 9.8M per mm².

The R7 Graphics is an integrated graphics processor (IGP) designed for AMD's Kaveri APU lineup, meaning it shares system memory rather than having dedicated VRAM. This architectural choice explains its lower TDP of 25 W versus the GTX 760M's 55 W — the latter is a discrete MXM module for laptops, complete with its own power delivery. The GTX 760M's memory subsystem features 2 GB of GDDR5 on a 128-bit bus, delivering 64.13 GB/s of bandwidth. The R7's memory bandwidth is "System Dependent," a qualitative descriptor acknowledging that performance scales with the host system's RAM configuration.

Shader resources differ dramatically: the GTX 760M packs 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs, while the R7 offers half the shading units (384), 24 TMUs, and just 8 ROPs. These specifications directly translate to the pixel rate (11.50 GPixel/s versus 5.760 GPixel/s) and texture rate (46.02 GTexel/s versus 17.28 GTexel/s) figures. Floating-point performance follows suit: the GTX 760M delivers 1,104.4 GFLOPS FP32, exactly double the R7's 553.0 GFLOPS.

API support shows a notable divergence. The R7 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), while the GTX 760M is limited to DirectX 12 (11_0) — a hardware feature-level difference that could affect compatibility with the latest DirectX 12 titles. Both support OpenGL 4.6 and Vulkan, though the GTX 760M's Vulkan version is slightly newer (1.2.175 versus 1.2.170).

# FAQ

Q: Which GPU has better raw compute performance?

A: The GTX 760M leads decisively in OpenCL, scoring 5,604 versus the R7's 4,015 — a 39.6% advantage. Its 768 shading units and 1,104.4 GFLOPS FP32 throughput provide double the shader count and compute capability of the R7's 384 units and 553.0 GFLOPS.

Q: Why does the AMD Radeon R7 Graphics win in Vulkan despite lower specifications?

A: The Vulkan benchmark shows the R7 scoring 5,980 against the GTX 760M's 4,868, an 18.6% margin. This outcome likely stems from the R7's newer GCN 2.0 architecture and its DirectX 12 (12_0) support, which may translate to better low-level API efficiency compared to the GTX 760M's DirectX 12 (11_0) capability.

Q: Is the GTX 760M suitable for gaming?

A: The data indicates reasonable DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175 support, with a 64.13 GB/s dedicated memory bandwidth. However, its 2 GB GDDR5 capacity and 128-bit bus are modest by modern standards, and the 31st percentile ranking suggests mid-to-low-tier positioning among all GPUs.

Q: What are the power implications of each GPU?

A: The R7 Graphics consumes 25 W as an integrated solution, while the GTX 760M draws 55 W as a discrete MXM module. The R7's lower power draw makes it suitable for compact systems, whereas the GTX 760M requires a dedicated slot and power delivery.

Q: How do these GPUs compare to their closest rivals?

A: The GTX 760M's nearest competitor is the GeForce 940M at 5,284 (-0.9% delta), while the R7's closest rival is the Radeon R5 M430 at 5,018 (-0.4% delta). Both GPUs sit within 1.5% of their respective peer averages.

Q: Which GPU has better long-term software support?

A: The R7 supports DirectX 12 (12_0), a higher feature level than the GTX 760M's DirectX 12 (11_0). However, both are end-of-life products, and the GTX 760M has a slightly newer Vulkan version (1.2.175 versus 1.2.170).

# Specification Differences

| Field | NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics |

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

| Chip | GK106S | Spectre Lite |

| Architecture | Kepler | GCN 2.0 |

| Transistors | 2,540 million | 2,410 million |

| Die Size | 221 mm² | 245 mm² |

| Transistor Density | 11.5M / mm² | 9.8M / mm² |

| Base Clock | 628 MHz | — |

| Boost Clock | 719 MHz | — |

| Memory Clock | 1002 MHz / 4 Gbps effective | System Shared |

| Memory Size | 2 GB | System Shared |

| Memory Type | GDDR5 | System Shared |

| Bus Width | 128 bit | System Shared |

| Bandwidth | 64.13 GB/s | System Dependent |

| Shading Units | 768 | 384 |

| TMUs | 64 | 24 |

| ROPs | 16 | 8 |

| Pixel Rate | 11.50 GPixel/s | 5.760 GPixel/s |

| Texture Rate | 46.02 GTexel/s | 17.28 GTexel/s |

| FP32 | 1,104.4 GFLOPS | 553.0 GFLOPS |

| TDP | 55 W | 25 W |

| Slot Width | MXM Module | IGP |

| Power Connectors | None | — |

| Bus Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | IGP |

| Display Outputs | Portable Device Dependent | Motherboard Dependent |

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

| Vulkan | 1.2.175 | 1.2.170 |

| Release Date | 2013-05-29 | 2014-02-16 |

| Predecessor | GeForce 600M | TeraScale 3 IGP |

| Successor | GeForce 800M | GCN 3.0 IGP |

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL test delivers the most lopsided result in this comparison. The GTX 760M posts 5,604 points, crushing the R7's 4,015 by 39.6%. This margin aligns with the raw specification gap: the GTX 760M's 768 shading units, 64 TMUs, and 16 ROPs overwhelm the R7's 384, 24, and 8 respectively. The GTX 760M also benefits from dedicated GDDR5 memory with 64.13 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the R7 relies on system-shared memory with bandwidth that varies by host configuration. In compute-heavy workloads that scale with shader count and memory throughput — such as OpenCL-based rendering, physics simulation, or data processing — the GTX 760M's architecture provides a structural advantage that the R7 cannot overcome.

The Vulkan benchmark reverses the narrative completely. The R7 scores 5,980, outperforming the GTX 760M's 4,868 by 18.6%. This is counterintuitive given the R7's lower raw specifications, but the result speaks to architectural efficiency differences in low-level APIs. The R7's GCN 2.0 design, paired with its DirectX 12 (12_0) feature level, may allow better utilization of available hardware in Vulkan's explicit, driver-controlled model. The GTX 760M's older Kepler architecture, with its DirectX 12 (11_0) limitation, appears less optimized for this workload. The fact that the R7 achieves a higher Vulkan score than OpenCL score (5,980 versus 4,015) suggests its compute resources are better leveraged through modern APIs, while the GTX 760M's OpenCL advantage (5,604 versus 4,868) indicates traditional compute paths favor NVIDIA's design.

# Where Each One Wins

The GTX 760M wins in OpenCL compute scenarios. Its 39.6% lead in that benchmark, combined with double the shading units and FP32 throughput, makes it the superior choice for applications that rely on OpenCL acceleration — including many productivity tools, scientific computing packages, and content-creation software. The 64.13 GB/s dedicated memory bandwidth further enhances its suitability for tasks that require frequent data movement between compute units and VRAM. Users working with GPU-accelerated rendering, video transcoding, or simulation workloads would benefit from the GTX 760M's compute headroom.

The AMD Radeon R7 Graphics wins in Vulkan-based scenarios. Its 18.6% benchmark advantage suggests better real-world performance in Vulkan games and applications that utilize this modern API. The R7's DirectX 12 (12_0) support also positions it favorably for newer DirectX 12 titles that may require this feature level. For gaming on integrated graphics, the R7's lower TDP (25 W versus 55 W) makes it an efficient choice for lightweight systems where power consumption matters. Additionally, the R7's system-shared memory model eliminates the 2 GB VRAM cap that limits the GTX 760M in high-resolution textures or large scene buffers.

Ultimately, the choice hinges on workload priorities. Compute-centric users should favor the GTX 760M; those prioritizing modern graphics APIs should lean toward the R7. The near-identical average benchmark scores (5,236 versus 4,998) and percentile rankings (31st versus 29th) indicate that neither GPU holds a universal advantage — their strengths are domain-specific rather than general-purpose.