Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) vs GeForce GTX 760A
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 760A and Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge), covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
760A outperforms R7 (Bristol Ridge) by a considerable 42% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 884 | 985 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 3.63 | 3.12 |
| Architecture | Kepler (2012−2018) | GCN 1.2 (2016) |
| GPU code name | GK106 | Bristol Ridge |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 17 March 2014 (12 years ago) | 1 June 2016 (10 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Real power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially if overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 768 | 512 |
| Core clock speed | 628 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 657 MHz | 900 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 2,540 million | 2410 Million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 12-45 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 42.05 | no data |
| Floating-point processing power | 1.009 TFLOPS | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | no data |
| TMUs | 64 | no data |
| L1 Cache | 64 KB | no data |
| L2 Cache | 256 KB | no data |
Form factor & compatibility
Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).
| Laptop size | no data | medium sized |
| Interface | PCIe 3.0 x16 | no data |
VRAM capacity and type
Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.
| Memory type | GDDR5 | no data |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | no data |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 64/128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 1002 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 64.13 GB/s | no data |
| Shared memory | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | No outputs | no data |
API and SDK support
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (11_0) | 12 (FL 12_0) |
| Shader Model | 5.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
| OpenCL | 1.2 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1.1.126 | - |
| CUDA | 3.0 | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark score.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
Average FPS across all PC games
Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:
| Full HD | 18−20
+28.6%
| 14 |
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Atomic Heart | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 1−2 | 1−2 |
Full HD
Medium
| Atomic Heart | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Fortnite | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11 | 10−11 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12 | 10−12 |
| Valorant | 35−40 | 35−40 |
Full HD
High
| Atomic Heart | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 35−40 | 35−40 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Dota 2 | 16 | 16 |
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Fortnite | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11 | 10−11 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 5 | 5 |
| Metro Exodus | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12 | 10−12 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| Valorant | 35−40 | 35−40 |
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Dota 2 | 14 | 14 |
| Far Cry 5 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 10−11 | 10−11 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−12 | 10−12 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 8−9 | 8−9 |
| Valorant | 35−40 | 35−40 |
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 8−9 | 8−9 |
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 12−14 | 12−14 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 18−20 | 18−20 |
| Valorant | 14−16 | 14−16 |
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 2−3 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 4−5 | 4−5 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4 | 3−4 |
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4 | 3−4 |
4K
High
| Atomic Heart | 1−2 | 1−2 |
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16 | 14−16 |
| Valorant | 10−11 | 10−11 |
4K
Ultra
| Dota 2 | 3−4 | 3−4 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3 | 2−3 |
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 3−4 | 3−4 |
This is how GTX 760A and R7 (Bristol Ridge) compete in popular games:
- GTX 760A is 29% faster in 1080p
All in all, in popular games:
- there's a draw in 51 tests (100%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.56 | 1.80 |
| Recency | 17 March 2014 | 1 June 2016 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 12 Watt |
GTX 760A has a 42% higher aggregate performance score.
R7 (Bristol Ridge), on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, and 78% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 760A is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
