AMD Radeon R9 M275X vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 Comparison

The AMD Radeon R9 M275X and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 occupy very different positions in the hardware landscape, and the benchmark data reflects that split clearly. Across the two recorded head-to-head tests, the GTX 760 wins both, but the margin tells a more nuanced story. In Geekbench OpenCL, the GTX 760 scores 11299 against the R9 M275X’s 11200, a narrow 0.9% advantage that places them effectively in the same performance class for that workload. In Geekbench Vulkan, however, the GTX 760 pulls decisively ahead with 12551 versus 9964, a 20.6% gap that shows a substantial architectural advantage in modern API scenarios.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The OpenCL result is the closer contest. The R9 M275X posts 11200, while the GTX 760 reaches 11299, a difference of only 99 points. For context, the R9 M275X’s average benchmark score across all recorded tests is 10582, and its nearest rival, the AMD Radeon RX 6600S, scores 10629, which is just 0.4% higher. The GTX 760’s OpenCL score sits slightly above that, but the R9 M275X is within striking distance. This suggests that for compute workloads that leverage OpenCL, the two cards are near peers, with the NVIDIA part holding a slim edge that could be attributed to its higher raw shading unit count and memory bandwidth.

The Vulkan benchmark is where the separation becomes stark. The GTX 760 scores 12551, while the R9 M275X manages 9964. The 20.6% deficit for the AMD part is not a minor gap; it indicates that the Kepler architecture, despite being older, has a more efficient path to Vulkan performance. The R9 M275X’s Vulkan score of 9964 is actually lower than its own OpenCL score of 11200, which is unusual and points to driver or hardware-level inefficiencies in the Vulkan pipeline for this GCN 1.0 part. Meanwhile, the GTX 760 improves from 11299 in OpenCL to 12551 in Vulkan, showing that its Vulkan implementation extracts more from the hardware.

Looking at the broader database context, the GTX 760’s average benchmark score is 9458, which places it at the 46th percentile of all GPUs. The R9 M275X has a higher average score of 10582 and sits at the 49th percentile. This is a curious inversion: the R9 M275X has a higher average and percentile, yet loses both head-to-head tests. The explanation lies in the test distribution. The R9 M275X has only two recorded benchmarks, both of which are relatively strong, while the GTX 760 has three, including a low Geekbench Metal score of 4524 that drags down its average. If the Metal test were excluded, the GTX 760’s average would be closer to its OpenCL and Vulkan scores, but as recorded, the data shows the R9 M275X as the higher-percentile part despite losing the direct comparisons.

The nearest rivals for each card provide additional calibration. The R9 M275X’s closest competitors include the AMD Radeon RX 6600S at 10629 (0.4% higher), the AMD Radeon RX 550X at 10481 (1% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560 Ti at 10690 (1% lower). The GTX 760’s rivals include the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK at 9474 (0.2% higher), the AMD Radeon R7 M380 at 9313 (1.6% lower), and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M at 9302 (1.7% lower). These figures show that the R9 M275X competes in a slightly higher average-score bracket, while the GTX 760 sits among parts with lower averages, but the head-to-head wins for the GTX 760 are unambiguous.

Architecture Differences

The two GPUs are built on the same 28 nm process at TSMC, but the similarities end there. The R9 M275X uses the Venus chip with GCN 1.0 architecture, while the GTX 760 uses the GK104 chip with Kepler architecture. The transistor counts diverge sharply: the R9 M275X packs 1,500 million transistors on a 123 mm² die, while the GTX 760 has 3,540 million transistors on a 294 mm² die. Transistor density is nearly identical at 12.2 million per mm² for the AMD part and 12.0 million per mm² for the NVIDIA part, so the difference in raw transistor count comes from the larger die, not a denser process.

The compute resources are heavily skewed toward the GTX 760. It has 1152 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 32 raster output pipelines, compared to the R9 M275X’s 640 shading units, 40 TMUs, and 16 ROPs. This more than doubles the texture and pixel throughput. The GTX 760 achieves a pixel rate of 24.77 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 99.07 GTexel/s, while the R9 M275X manages 14.80 GPixel/s and 37.00 GTexel/s. The FP32 compute is also lopsided: 2.378 TFLOPS for the GTX 760 against 1,184.0 GFLOPS for the R9 M275X, a near doubling of raw floating-point capability.

Memory configurations differ as well. Both use 2 GB of GDDR5, but the GTX 760 runs a 256-bit bus with 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth, while the R9 M275X uses a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s. The memory clock rates are 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the GTX 760 and 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for the R9 M275X. This bandwidth gap is critical for high-resolution textures and multi-sample anti-aliasing, where the GTX 760 has a clear advantage.

Clock speeds favor the NVIDIA part as well. The GTX 760 has a base clock of 980 MHz and a boost clock of 1032 MHz, while the R9 M275X runs at 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost. The API support is similar but not identical: both support DirectX 12 (with the R9 M275X at 11_1 and the GTX 760 at 11_0) and OpenGL 4.6, but the Vulkan versions differ, with the R9 M275X at 1.2.170 and the GTX 760 at 1.2.175. That small Vulkan version difference may contribute to the 20.6% gap in the Vulkan benchmark, though the hardware differences are likely the dominant factor.

The physical and power profiles are also distinct. The GTX 760 has a TDP of 170 W, requires a 450 W power supply, uses dual-slot cooling, and needs two 6-pin power connectors. It measures 241 mm (9.5 inches) in length. The R9 M275X has no recorded TDP, slot width, or power connector data, which suggests it is a mobile-oriented part with lower power draw, but the database does not provide a figure. The GTX 760’s display outputs include 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2, while the R9 M275X has no recorded display output configuration.

Where Each One Wins

The GTX 760 wins in every recorded head-to-head benchmark, but the contexts matter. For OpenCL compute tasks, the win is marginal at 0.9%, meaning the R9 M275X is competitive for applications that rely on OpenCL, such as certain physics simulations, image processing, or database-style parallel workloads. The R9 M275X’s higher average benchmark score (10582 versus 9458) and higher percentile (49th versus 46th) suggest that in mixed workloads or tests not captured in the head-to-head list, it may hold its own or even outperform the GTX 760. The data does not specify which tests contribute to the average, but the percentile ranking indicates that the R9 M275X is not a slouch overall.

The GTX 760’s decisive win in Vulkan (20.6% ahead) makes it the clear choice for any modern API-driven gaming or compute load. Vulkan is increasingly used in game engines and professional applications, and the 12551 score shows that the Kepler architecture, despite its age, can handle Vulkan efficiently. The GTX 760 also has a significant hardware resource advantage: double the ROPs, more than double the TMUs, and nearly double the FP32 throughput. For texture-heavy rendering, high pixel fill rates, or memory-bandwidth-sensitive tasks, the GTX 760 is categorically superior.

The R9 M275X’s strengths are less visible in the head-to-head data but can be inferred from its average score. It has a smaller die (123 mm² versus 294 mm²) and fewer transistors, which likely translates to lower power consumption and heat output, though no TDP is recorded for the AMD part. For mobile or compact systems where the GTX 760’s 170 W TDP and dual-slot cooler would be impractical, the R9 M275X is the more feasible option. Its higher average benchmark score also suggests that in OpenCL or other compute scenarios not dominated by Vulkan, it can match or exceed the GTX 760, as the 0.9% OpenCL gap demonstrates.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 wins both recorded head-to-head benchmarks, with a narrow 0.9% lead in OpenCL and a commanding 20.6% lead in Vulkan. If the decision rests solely on these two tests, the GTX 760 is the superior performer. Its 1152 shading units, 96 TMUs, 32 ROPs, 192.3 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 2.378 TFLOPS FP32 capability provide a hardware foundation that the R9 M275X cannot match, and the Vulkan result confirms that this translates into real-world API performance.

However, the R9 M275X has a higher average benchmark score and percentile rank, which tempers the verdict. For users who prioritize OpenCL workloads, the R9 M275X is effectively a peer, losing by less than 1%. The GTX 760’s average score is dragged down by its Geekbench Metal result of 4524, which is far below its OpenCL and Vulkan scores. If Metal performance is irrelevant to the user, the GTX 760’s average would be misleadingly low, and the head-to-head wins are the more reliable indicator.

The choice depends on the use case. For gaming or compute that leverages Vulkan, the GTX 760 is the only rational pick, as the 20.6% margin is too large to ignore. For OpenCL-centric tasks, the R9 M275X offers near-identical performance with a likely lower power footprint, though the database does not record its TDP. For compact or mobile systems, the R9 M275X’s smaller die and unspecified power draw make it the safer bet, but the GTX 760’s 170 W TDP and 241 mm length are manageable in a desktop tower. The verdict: the GTX 760 wins on raw performance and modern API efficiency, while the R9 M275X wins on efficiency and average score consistency, but the head-to-head data favors the NVIDIA part in direct competition.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU wins the Geekbench OpenCL benchmark?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 scores 11299, while the AMD Radeon R9 M275X scores 11200, giving the GTX 760 a 0.9% lead.

Q: How large is the Vulkan performance gap?

A: The GTX 760 scores 12551 in Geekbench Vulkan, while the R9 M275X scores 9964, a 20.6% advantage for the NVIDIA part.

Q: Which card has more shading units?

A: The GTX 760 has 1152 shading units, while the R9 M275X has 640, nearly double the count.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The GTX 760 has a 256-bit bus with 192.3 GB/s bandwidth, while the R9 M275X has a 128-bit bus with 72.00 GB/s.

Q: Are both GPUs on the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both use a 28 nm process at TSMC, but the GTX 760 has a larger die (294 mm²) and more transistors (3,540 million) compared to the R9 M275X (123 mm², 1,500 million).

Q: Which card has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The R9 M275X has an average score of 10582, which is higher than the GTX 760’s 9458, and it also ranks higher at the 49th percentile versus the 46th.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every recorded specification. The process node is identical at 28 nm, but the transistor count and die size differ significantly: 1,500 million transistors on 123 mm² for the R9 M275X, versus 3,540 million on 294 mm² for the GTX 760. Transistor density is close at 12.2M/mm² and 12.0M/mm², respectively. Clock speeds favor the GTX 760, with a base of 980 MHz and boost of 1032 MHz against the R9 M275X’s 900 MHz base and 925 MHz boost. Memory clocks are 1502 MHz (6 Gbps effective) for the GTX 760 and 1125 MHz (4.5 Gbps effective) for the R9 M275X. Both have 2 GB of GDDR5, but the bus width is 256-bit for the GTX 760 and 128-bit for the R9 M275X, yielding bandwidths of 192.3 GB/s and 72.00 GB/s. The GTX 760 has 1152 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, while the R9 M275X has 640, 40, and 16. Pixel rates are 24.77 GPixel/s versus 14.80 GPixel/s, and texture rates are 99.07 GTexel/s versus 37.00 GTexel/s. FP32 compute is 2.378 TFLOPS for the GTX 760 and 1,184.0 GFLOPS for the R9 M275X. The GTX 760 has a TDP of 170 W, a dual-slot form factor, two 6-pin power connectors, a 450 W suggested PSU, and a 241 mm length; the R9 M275X has no recorded values for these fields. The GTX 760 supports DirectX 12 (11_0), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the R9 M275X supports DirectX 12 (11_1), OpenGL 4.6, and Vulkan 1.2.170. Display outputs are recorded only for the GTX 760: 2x DVI, 1x HDMI 1.4a, and 1x DisplayPort 1.2. The release dates differ, with the GTX 760 from June 2013 and the R9 M275X from January 2014. The GTX 760 has a recorded launch MSRP of 249 USD, while the R9 M275X has none.