AMD Radeon Vega 8 vs NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 Comparison

The benchmark data presents a fascinating generational clash between a dedicated desktop GPU from 2013 and an integrated graphics processor from 2018. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 and AMD Radeon Vega 8 occupy different worlds in terms of design philosophy and target use case, yet their average scores place them surprisingly close in the overall performance hierarchy. With an average benchmark score of 9458, the GTX 760 sits at the 46th percentile of all GPUs, while the Vega 8 achieves an average of 9221, placing it at the 45th percentile. This near-parity in overall standing makes the specific benchmark results all the more revealing, as each card demonstrates clear strengths in different API environments.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head comparison is the AMD Radeon Vega 8’s overwhelming victory in the Geekbench Metal test. Here, the Vega 8 scores 10706, while the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 manages only 4524. This represents a delta of -57.7% for the GTX 760, meaning the Vega 8 is more than twice as fast in this specific workload. The magnitude of this win is significant enough to suggest that the Vega 8’s architecture has a fundamental advantage in Metal-optimized tasks, likely due to its newer GCN 5.0 design which was built with more modern API feature support in mind. The GTX 760, with its Kepler architecture and DirectX 12 (11_0) support, simply cannot keep pace when Metal is the rendering API.

However, the story reverses dramatically when the testing moves to OpenCL and Vulkan. In the Geekbench OpenCL test, the GTX 760 posts a score of 11299, defeating the Vega 8’s 8822 by a margin of 28.1%. This is a substantial lead that showcases the dedicated GPU’s raw compute capabilities, particularly its higher texture and pixel fill rates combined with a much larger memory bandwidth. The GTX 760’s advantage in Vulkan is even more pronounced. With a score of 12551 against the Vega 8’s 8134, the NVIDIA card wins by a decisive 54.3%. This suggests that Kepler architecture, despite its age, has robust Vulkan driver implementation and hardware that scales well with the low-level API, whereas the Vega 8’s integrated nature and shared memory subsystem become a bottleneck in this scenario.

The overall win tally shows the GTX 760 taking 2 out of 3 benchmarks, with its victories in OpenCL and Vulkan carrying more weight in terms of average score contribution. The Vega 8’s single but massive win in Metal reflects its architectural efficiency in that specific API, but it is not enough to offset the GTX 760’s dominance in the other two tests. The data implies that the GTX 760 is the more versatile performer for general-purpose compute and modern gaming APIs, while the Vega 8 is specifically optimized for Apple’s Metal framework, which is a critical consideration for users in that ecosystem.

FAQ

Q: Which GPU has the higher average benchmark score, and by how much?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 has a higher average benchmark score of 9458, compared to the AMD Radeon Vega 8’s 9221. The difference is 237 points, which is approximately a 2.6% advantage for the GTX 760.

Q: In which benchmark does the AMD Radeon Vega 8 achieve its largest margin of victory?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 achieves its largest margin of victory in the Geekbench Metal test, where it scores 10706 against the GTX 760’s 4524. This represents a delta of -57.7% from the perspective of the GTX 760, indicating the Vega 8 is significantly faster.

Q: How does the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 perform relative to its nearest rivals in the benchmark database?

A: The GTX 760 has an average score of 9458, which is -0.2% behind the NVIDIA GeForce GTX TITAN BLACK (9474) and 1.6% ahead of the AMD Radeon R7 M380 (9313). It also leads the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 850M (9302) by 1.7% and the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 465 (9294) by 1.8%.

Q: What is the difference in process node technology between the two GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 is manufactured on a 28 nm process node at TSMC, while the AMD Radeon Vega 8 uses a more advanced 14 nm process node from GlobalFoundries. This difference contributes to the Vega 8 having a much higher transistor density of 23.5M / mm² compared to the GTX 760’s 12.0M / mm².

Q: Which GPU supports a newer version of the Vulkan API?

A: The AMD Radeon Vega 8 supports Vulkan 1.3, which is a newer version than the Vulkan 1.2.175 supported by the NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760. This newer API support may explain the Vega 8’s architecture’s readiness for modern applications, despite its lower raw performance in Vulkan benchmarks.

Q: What is the memory configuration difference between the two GPUs?

A: The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 has a dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, providing a bandwidth of 192.3 GB/s. The AMD Radeon Vega 8 uses System Shared memory, meaning its bandwidth is System Dependent and it has no dedicated VRAM. This is a critical architectural distinction that impacts performance in memory-intensive tasks.

Architecture Differences

The architectural chasm between these two GPUs is vast, reflecting their different eras and design goals. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 is built on the Kepler architecture, featuring the GK104 chip manufactured by TSMC on a 28 nm process. This chip contains 3,540 million transistors on a die size of 294 mm², resulting in a transistor density of 12.0M / mm². In contrast, the AMD Radeon Vega 8 uses the GCN 5.0 architecture with the Raven chip, produced by GlobalFoundries on a more advanced 14 nm process. Despite having more transistors at 4,940 million, the Raven chip is smaller at 210 mm², leading to a much higher density of 23.5M / mm². This density difference highlights the efficiency gains from the newer manufacturing process.

The core configurations are equally divergent. The GTX 760 packs 1152 shading units, 96 texture mapping units, and 32 ROPs. This hardware configuration yields a pixel rate of 24.77 GPixel/s and a texture rate of 99.07 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance rated at 2.378 TFLOPS. The Vega 8, by contrast, has only 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. Its pixel rate is just 8.800 GPixel/s and its texture rate is 35.20 GTexel/s, with FP32 performance at 1,126.4 GFLOPS. Interestingly, the Vega 8 does support FP16 at 2.253 TFLOPS (2:1), a feature the GTX 760 lacks entirely, which could be relevant for certain compute workloads that leverage half-precision arithmetic.

Memory architecture presents the most fundamental difference. The GTX 760 uses a dedicated 2 GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus, delivering 192.3 GB/s of bandwidth. This dedicated memory is a significant advantage for gaming and GPU-intensive tasks, as it does not compete with the CPU for bandwidth. The Vega 8, being an IGP (Integrated Graphics Processor), relies on System Shared memory. Its bus width and memory type are both listed as "System Shared," and its bandwidth is "System Dependent." This means the Vega 8’s performance is heavily influenced by the system’s RAM configuration, which can vary widely between implementations. The TDP difference is stark: the GTX 760 draws 170 W and requires a dual-slot cooler with 2x 6-pin power connectors, while the Vega 8 sips just 25 W and has no power connectors, being an IGP.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear conclusion for different user profiles. The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 is the superior choice for general-purpose computing and gaming, as evidenced by its wins in OpenCL and Vulkan benchmarks. Its dedicated memory and higher raw fill rates give it a decisive edge in scenarios that stress memory bandwidth and texture throughput. The 28.1% lead in OpenCL and 54.3% lead in Vulkan are not marginal; they represent a class difference in capability for those APIs. For users running Windows or Linux applications that rely on these APIs, the GTX 760 is the unequivocal performer.

However, the AMD Radeon Vega 8’s staggering 57.7% victory in the Metal benchmark cannot be ignored. This result demonstrates that for users primarily working within Apple’s Metal ecosystem, the Vega 8 is not just competitive but dramatically faster. The score of 10706 versus 4524 suggests that the Vega 8’s architecture is significantly better optimized for Metal’s specific requirements. This makes the Vega 8 the logical pick for users whose primary workload is Metal-based, such as certain professional creative applications or specific game titles. The choice ultimately depends on the API environment: the GTX 760 for OpenCL and Vulkan, the Vega 8 for Metal.

Specification Differences

The two GPUs differ across nearly every specification category. The process node is a key divider: the GTX 760 uses 28 nm from TSMC, while the Vega 8 uses 14 nm from GlobalFoundries. Transistor counts are 3,540 million for the GTX 760 and 4,940 million for the Vega 8, with die sizes of 294 mm² and 210 mm² respectively. The clock speeds show an interesting inversion: the GTX 760 has a base clock of 980 MHz and a boost clock of 1032 MHz, while the Vega 8 has a much lower base of 300 MHz but a higher boost of 1100 MHz. Memory configurations are polar opposites, with the GTX 760 featuring 2 GB GDDR5 on a 256-bit bus at 192.3 GB/s, and the Vega 8 using System Shared memory with System Dependent bandwidth.

The shader and texture resources are heavily skewed toward the GTX 760, which has 1152 shading units, 96 TMUs, and 32 ROPs, versus the Vega 8’s 512 shading units, 32 TMUs, and 8 ROPs. This leads to pixel rates of 24.77 GPixel/s for the GTX 760 versus 8.800 GPixel/s for the Vega 8, and texture rates of 99.07 GTexel/s versus 35.20 GTexel/s. FP32 performance is 2.378 TFLOPS for the GTX 760 and 1,126.4 GFLOPS for the Vega 8, though the Vega 8 adds FP16 support at 2.253 TFLOPS (2:1), which the GTX 760 lacks. Power consumption is a major differentiator: the GTX 760 has a TDP of 170 W, is dual-slot, and requires 2x 6-pin connectors, while the Vega 8 has a TDP of 25 W, is an IGP, and requires no power connectors. API support also differs, with the GTX 760 offering DirectX 12 (11_0) and Vulkan 1.2.175, while the Vega 8 offers DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3. The GTX 760 has a launch MSRP of 249 USD, while the Vega 8 has no listed MSRP.

Where Each One Wins

The NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 wins decisively in OpenCL and Vulkan workloads. Its 28.1% lead in OpenCL and 54.3% lead in Vulkan make it the clear choice for users running compute tasks in these APIs, such as OpenCL-based rendering or Vulkan-powered games. The dedicated 2 GB GDDR5 memory and 192.3 GB/s bandwidth provide a substantial advantage in memory-intensive scenarios, making it suitable for high-resolution texture loading and complex shader operations. The GTX 760 also holds the overall average score advantage at 9458 versus 9221, reinforcing its status as the more capable all-rounder for traditional GPU tasks.

The AMD Radeon Vega 8 wins exclusively in the Metal benchmark, but it wins big. The score of 10706 versus 4524 is a massive 57.7% margin, indicating that for Metal-specific applications, the Vega 8 operates in a different performance league. This makes it the superior choice for macOS users or developers targeting Metal as their primary rendering API. Additionally, the Vega 8’s 25 W TDP and IGP form factor mean it requires no additional power connectors and produces far less heat, making it suitable for compact, low-power systems. Its support for newer APIs like DirectX 12 (12_1) and Vulkan 1.3 also suggests better forward compatibility with emerging software standards, even if its raw performance in those APIs currently trails the GTX 760.