Radeon R7 265 vs GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB

Place in the ranking	217	438
Place by popularity	18	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	22.55	5.27
Power efficiency	14.21	4.76
Architecture	Pascal (2016−2021)	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code name	GP106	Pitcairn
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	18 August 2016 (8 years ago)	13 February 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 1060 3 GB has 328% better value for money than R7 265.

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	1152	1024
Core clock speed	1506 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	1708 MHz	925 MHz
Number of transistors	4,400 million	2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	150 Watt
Texture fill rate	123.0	59.20
Floating-point processing power	3.935 TFLOPS	1.894 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	32
TMUs	72	64

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).

Bus support	no data	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	250 mm	210 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin	1 x 6-pin

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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	192 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	2002 MHz	1400 MHz
Memory bandwidth	192.2 GB/s	179.2 GB/s

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectors	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Eyefinity	-	+
HDMI	+	+

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

CrossFire	-	+
FreeSync	-	+
DDMA audio	no data	+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX	12 (12_1)	DirectX® 12
Shader Model	6.4	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	1.2	1.2
Vulkan	+	-
CUDA	6.1	-

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	24.87	10.41
Recency	18 August 2016	13 February 2014
Maximum RAM amount	3 GB	4 GB
Chip lithography	16 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	120 Watt	150 Watt

GTX 1060 3 GB has a 138.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 25% lower power consumption.

R7 265, on the other hand, has a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount.

The GeForce GTX 1060 3 GB is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 265 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.