Radeon HD 4670 vs GeForce GTX 760

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 760 and Radeon HD 4670, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 760
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 170 Watt
12.41
+1166%

GTX 760 outperforms ATI HD 4670 by a whopping 1166% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in performance ranking3701072
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.420.01
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)TeraScale (2005−2013)
GPU code nameGK104RV730
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date25 June 2013 (11 years ago)10 September 2008 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$249 $67
Current price$136 (0.5x MSRP)$181 (2.7x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 760 has 44100% better value for money than ATI HD 4670.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores1152320
CUDA cores1152no data
Core clock speed980 MHz750 MHz
Boost clock speed1033 MHzno data
Number of transistors3,540 million514 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm55 nm
Power consumption (TDP)170 Watt59 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature97 °Cno data
Texture fill rate94.1 billion/sec24.00
Floating-point performance2,378 gflops480.0 gflops

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 supportPCI Express 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length9.5" (24.1 cm)193 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot1-slot
Minimum recommended system power500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectorsTwo 6-pinNone
SLI options+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 typeGDDR5GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount2 GB512 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed3000 MHz2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth192.2 GB/s32 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x S-Video
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
HDMI+no data
HDCP+no data
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

Blu Ray 3D+no data
3D Gaming+no data
3D Vision+no data
PhysX+no data
3D Vision Live+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)10.1 (10_1)
Shader Model5.14.1
OpenGL4.33.3
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan1.1.126N/A
CUDA+no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

GTX 760 12.41
+1166%
ATI HD 4670 0.98

GeForce GTX 760 outperforms Radeon HD 4670 by 1166% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

GTX 760 4793
+1161%
ATI HD 4670 380

GeForce GTX 760 outperforms Radeon HD 4670 by 1161% in Passmark.

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 HD66
+1220%
5−6
−1220%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 240−250
+1163%
18−20
−1163%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 300−310
+1100%
24−27
−1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 250−260
+1150%
20−22
−1150%
Battlefield 5 500−550
+1150%
40−45
−1150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 300−310
+1100%
24−27
−1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 240−250
+1163%
18−20
−1163%
Far Cry 5 350−400
+1107%
27−30
−1107%
Far Cry New Dawn 400−450
+1076%
30−35
−1076%
Forza Horizon 4 750−800
+1150%
60−65
−1150%
Hitman 3 300−310
+1150%
24−27
−1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 600−650
+1076%
50−55
−1076%
Metro Exodus 500−550
+1150%
40−45
−1150%
Red Dead Redemption 2 400−450
+1043%
35−40
−1043%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 450−500
+1084%
35−40
−1084%
Watch Dogs: Legion 500−550
+1090%
40−45
−1090%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 300−310
+1100%
24−27
−1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 250−260
+1150%
20−22
−1150%
Battlefield 5 500−550
+1150%
40−45
−1150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 300−310
+1100%
24−27
−1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 240−250
+1163%
18−20
−1163%
Far Cry 5 350−400
+1107%
27−30
−1107%
Far Cry New Dawn 400−450
+1076%
30−35
−1076%
Forza Horizon 4 750−800
+1150%
60−65
−1150%
Hitman 3 300−310
+1150%
24−27
−1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 600−650
+1076%
50−55
−1076%
Metro Exodus 500−550
+1150%
40−45
−1150%
Red Dead Redemption 2 400−450
+1043%
35−40
−1043%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 450−500
+1084%
35−40
−1084%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 300−310
+1054%
24−27
−1054%
Watch Dogs: Legion 500−550
+1090%
40−45
−1090%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 300−310
+1100%
24−27
−1100%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 250−260
+1150%
20−22
−1150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 300−310
+1100%
24−27
−1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 240−250
+1163%
18−20
−1163%
Far Cry 5 350−400
+1107%
27−30
−1107%
Forza Horizon 4 750−800
+1150%
60−65
−1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 600−650
+1076%
50−55
−1076%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 450−500
+1084%
35−40
−1084%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 300−310
+1054%
24−27
−1054%
Watch Dogs: Legion 500−550
+1090%
40−45
−1090%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 400−450
+1043%
35−40
−1043%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 300−310
+1150%
24−27
−1150%
Far Cry New Dawn 270−280
+1127%
21−24
−1127%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 150−160
+1150%
12−14
−1150%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 110−120
+1122%
9−10
−1122%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 180−190
+1100%
14−16
−1100%
Cyberpunk 2077 75−80
+1150%
6−7
−1150%
Far Cry 5 250−260
+1150%
20−22
−1150%
Forza Horizon 4 290−300
+1161%
21−24
−1161%
Hitman 3 180−190
+1100%
14−16
−1100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 300−310
+1100%
24−27
−1100%
Metro Exodus 250−260
+1150%
20−22
−1150%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 250−260
+1150%
20−22
−1150%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 150−160
+1150%
12−14
−1150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 85−90
+1114%
7−8
−1114%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 250−260
+1150%
20−22
−1150%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 150−160
+1150%
12−14
−1150%
Far Cry New Dawn 110−120
+1122%
9−10
−1122%
Hitman 3 100−105
+1150%
8−9
−1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+1131%
12−14
−1131%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+1114%
7−8
−1114%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 130−140
+1082%
10−12
−1082%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 85−90
+1114%
7−8
−1114%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 75−80
+1150%
6−7
−1150%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 75−80
+1150%
6−7
−1150%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+1100%
2−3
−1100%
Far Cry 5 85−90
+1114%
7−8
−1114%
Forza Horizon 4 200−210
+1150%
16−18
−1150%
Horizon Zero Dawn 160−170
+1131%
12−14
−1131%
Metro Exodus 150−160
+1150%
12−14
−1150%
Watch Dogs: Legion 60−65
+1100%
5−6
−1100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 130−140
+1082%
10−12
−1082%

This is how GTX 760 and ATI HD 4670 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 760 is 1220% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 12.41 0.98
Recency 25 June 2013 10 September 2008
Cost $249 $67
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 512 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 55 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 170 Watt 59 Watt

The GeForce GTX 760 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 4670 in performance tests.


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

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 760
GeForce GTX 760
ATI Radeon HD 4670
Radeon HD 4670

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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 1961 vote

Rate GeForce GTX 760 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 143 votes

Rate Radeon HD 4670 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.