Radeon R9 295X2 vs GeForce GTX 1070

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 1070 and Radeon R9 295X2, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 1070
2016
8 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
35.06
+57.6%

GTX 1070 outperforms R9 295X2 by an impressive 58% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking148258
Place by popularity26not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation23.632.41
Power efficiency16.073.06
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameGP104Vesuvius
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date10 June 2016 (8 years ago)29 April 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$379 $1,499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

GTX 1070 has 880% better value for money than R9 295X2.

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 cores19202816 ×2
Core clock speed1506 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1683 MHz1018 MHz
Number of transistors7,200 million6,200 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt500 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature94 °Cno data
Texture fill rate202.0179.2 ×2
Floating-point processing power6.463 TFLOPS5.733 TFLOPS ×2
ROPs6464 ×2
TMUs120176 ×2

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 supportPCIe 3.0PCIe 2.1 x16
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm307 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 8-pin2 x 8-pin
SLI options+-

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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount8 GB8 GB ×2
Memory bus width256 Bit512 Bit ×2
Memory clock speed8 GB/s1250 MHz
Memory bandwidth256 GB/s640 GB/s ×2
Shared memory--

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 ConnectorsDP 1.42, HDMI 2.0b, Dual Link-DVI1x DVI, 4x mini-DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
Eyefinity-+
HDMI++
G-SYNC support+-

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
LiquidVR-+
TressFX-+
UVD-+
DDMA audiono data+
GPU Boost3.0no data
VR Ready+no data
Ansel+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.46.3
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan++
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

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.

GTX 1070 35.06
+57.6%
R9 295X2 22.25

  • Other tests
    • Passmark
    • 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

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.

GTX 1070 13508
+57.6%
R9 295X2 8573

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 1070 18255
R9 295X2 21197
+16.1%

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 HD117
+67.1%
70−75
−67.1%
1440p69
+72.5%
40−45
−72.5%
4K49
+63.3%
30−35
−63.3%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.24
+561%
21.41
−561%
1440p5.49
+582%
37.48
−582%
4K7.73
+546%
49.97
−546%
  • GTX 1070 has 561% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GTX 1070 has 582% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GTX 1070 has 546% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

  • Full HD
    Low Preset
  • Full HD
    Medium Preset
  • Full HD
    High Preset
  • Full HD
    Ultra Preset
  • Full HD
    Epic Preset
  • 1440p
    High Preset
  • 1440p
    Ultra Preset
  • 1440p
    Epic Preset
  • 4K
    High Preset
  • 4K
    Ultra Preset
  • 4K
    Epic Preset
Atomic Heart 95−100
+60%
60−65
−60%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+57.8%
45−50
−57.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
+64.4%
45−50
−64.4%
Atomic Heart 95−100
+60%
60−65
−60%
Battlefield 5 141
+65.9%
85−90
−65.9%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+57.8%
45−50
−57.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
+64.4%
45−50
−64.4%
Far Cry 5 106
+63.1%
65−70
−63.1%
Fortnite 256
+60%
160−170
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 129
+61.3%
80−85
−61.3%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+58.3%
60−65
−58.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 135
+58.8%
85−90
−58.8%
Valorant 200−210
+67.5%
120−130
−67.5%
Atomic Heart 95−100
+60%
60−65
−60%
Battlefield 5 119
+58.7%
75−80
−58.7%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+57.8%
45−50
−57.8%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 270−280
+62.4%
170−180
−62.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
+64.4%
45−50
−64.4%
Dota 2 130−140
+62.4%
85−90
−62.4%
Far Cry 5 100
+66.7%
60−65
−66.7%
Fortnite 175
+59.1%
110−120
−59.1%
Forza Horizon 4 121
+61.3%
75−80
−61.3%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+58.3%
60−65
−58.3%
Grand Theft Auto V 111
+58.6%
70−75
−58.6%
Metro Exodus 62
+77.1%
35−40
−77.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 122
+62.7%
75−80
−62.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 120
+60%
75−80
−60%
Valorant 200−210
+67.5%
120−130
−67.5%
Battlefield 5 107
+64.6%
65−70
−64.6%
Counter-Strike 2 70−75
+57.8%
45−50
−57.8%
Cyberpunk 2077 70−75
+64.4%
45−50
−64.4%
Dota 2 130−140
+62.4%
85−90
−62.4%
Far Cry 5 90
+63.6%
55−60
−63.6%
Forza Horizon 4 94
+70.9%
55−60
−70.9%
Forza Horizon 5 95−100
+58.3%
60−65
−58.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 81
+62%
50−55
−62%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 63
+80%
35−40
−80%
Valorant 200−210
+67.5%
120−130
−67.5%
Fortnite 127
+58.8%
80−85
−58.8%
Counter-Strike 2 27−30
+75%
16−18
−75%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 220−230
+60.7%
140−150
−60.7%
Grand Theft Auto V 60−65
+60%
40−45
−60%
Metro Exodus 38
+58.3%
24−27
−58.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+59.1%
110−120
−59.1%
Valorant 230−240
+58%
150−160
−58%
Battlefield 5 84
+68%
50−55
−68%
Cyberpunk 2077 35−40
+71.4%
21−24
−71.4%
Far Cry 5 68
+70%
40−45
−70%
Forza Horizon 4 79
+58%
50−55
−58%
Forza Horizon 5 55−60
+65.7%
35−40
−65.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+68.6%
35−40
−68.6%
Fortnite 79
+58%
50−55
−58%
Atomic Heart 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Grand Theft Auto V 62
+77.1%
35−40
−77.1%
Metro Exodus 23
+64.3%
14−16
−64.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 43
+59.3%
27−30
−59.3%
Valorant 190−200
+65%
120−130
−65%
Battlefield 5 45
+66.7%
27−30
−66.7%
Counter-Strike 2 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Dota 2 95−100
+65%
60−65
−65%
Far Cry 5 35
+66.7%
21−24
−66.7%
Forza Horizon 4 52
+73.3%
30−33
−73.3%
Forza Horizon 5 30−35
+61.9%
21−24
−61.9%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35
+66.7%
21−24
−66.7%
Fortnite 39
+62.5%
24−27
−62.5%

This is how GTX 1070 and R9 295X2 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 1070 is 67% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 1070 is 73% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 1070 is 63% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 35.06 22.25
Recency 10 June 2016 29 April 2014
Chip lithography 16 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 500 Watt

GTX 1070 has a 57.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, a 75% more advanced lithography process, and 233.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1070 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R9 295X2 in performance tests.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070
GeForce GTX 1070
AMD Radeon R9 295X2
Radeon R9 295X2

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


4.3
8927 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1070 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8
96 votes

Rate Radeon R9 295X2 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about GeForce GTX 1070 or Radeon R9 295X2, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.