Radeon R7 265 vs GeForce GTX 960

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 960 and Radeon R7 265, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 960
2015
4 GB GDDR5, 120 Watt
15.75
+51.6%

GTX 960 outperforms R7 265 by an impressive 52% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking338433
Place by popularity59not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.855.06
Power efficiency9.094.80
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameGM206Pitcairn
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date22 January 2015 (9 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 960 has 75% 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 cores10241024
Core clock speed1127 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1178 MHz925 MHz
Number of transistors2,940 million2,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate75.3959.20
Floating-point processing power2.413 TFLOPS1.894 TFLOPS
ROPs3232
TMUs6464

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 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length241 mm210 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)400 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin1 x 6-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 amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/s1400 MHz
Memory bandwidth112 GB/s179.2 GB/s
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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.22x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
Eyefinity-+
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support+-
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire-+
FreeSync-+
DDMA audiono data+
GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.45.1
OpenGL4.44.6
OpenCL1.21.2
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. 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 960 15.75
+51.6%
R7 265 10.39

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 960 7916
+51.6%
R7 265 5220

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 HD60
+71.4%
35−40
−71.4%
4K31
+72.2%
18−21
−72.2%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.324.26
4K6.428.28

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+71.4%
21−24
−71.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+70%
30−33
−70%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+59.3%
27−30
−59.3%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+55.4%
65−70
−55.4%
Hitman 3 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+58%
50−55
−58%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+54.3%
35−40
−54.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+59.3%
27−30
−59.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+70%
30−33
−70%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+60%
50−55
−60%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+71.4%
21−24
−71.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+70%
30−33
−70%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+59.3%
27−30
−59.3%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+55.4%
65−70
−55.4%
Hitman 3 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+58%
50−55
−58%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+54.3%
35−40
−54.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+59.3%
27−30
−59.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+70%
30−33
−70%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 131
+54.1%
85−90
−54.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+60%
50−55
−60%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35−40
+71.4%
21−24
−71.4%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+56.3%
16−18
−56.3%
Far Cry 5 35−40
+54.2%
24−27
−54.2%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110
+55.4%
65−70
−55.4%
Hitman 3 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+58%
50−55
−58%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 50−55
+70%
30−33
−70%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 28
+55.6%
18−20
−55.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 80−85
+60%
50−55
−60%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+59.3%
27−30
−59.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 30−33
+66.7%
18−20
−66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 24−27
+71.4%
14−16
−71.4%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 12−14
+62.5%
8−9
−62.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+80%
10−11
−80%
Forza Horizon 4 80−85
+66%
50−55
−66%
Hitman 3 18−20
+58.3%
12−14
−58.3%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−35
+52.4%
21−24
−52.4%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+55.6%
18−20
−55.6%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+61.1%
18−20
−61.1%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+70%
10−11
−70%
Watch Dogs: Legion 95−100
+60%
60−65
−60%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+62.5%
16−18
−62.5%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 14−16
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+71.4%
7−8
−71.4%
Hitman 3 10−12
+57.1%
7−8
−57.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 75−80
+58%
50−55
−58%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+66.7%
9−10
−66.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
+80%
5−6
−80%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 8−9
+60%
5−6
−60%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+75%
12−14
−75%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+60%
10−11
−60%
Watch Dogs: Legion 6−7
+100%
3−4
−100%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+55.6%
9−10
−55.6%

This is how GTX 960 and R7 265 compete in popular games:

  • GTX 960 is 71% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 960 is 72% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 15.75 10.39
Recency 22 January 2015 13 February 2014
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 150 Watt

GTX 960 has a 51.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, and 25% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 960 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.

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 960
GeForce GTX 960
AMD Radeon R7 265
Radeon R7 265

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 3752 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 960 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 373 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 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.