Radeon 760M vs P102-100

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared P102-100 with Radeon 760M, including specs and performance data.

P102-100
2018
5 GB GDDR5X, 250 Watt
8.01

760M outperforms P102-100 by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking537399
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.22no data
Power efficiency2.4467.09
ArchitecturePascal (2016−2021)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2025)
GPU code nameGP102Phoenix
Market segmentWorkstationDesktop
Release date12 February 2018 (7 years ago)31 January 2024 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$599 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

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 cores3200512
Core clock speed1582 MHz800 MHz
Boost clock speed1683 MHz2599 MHz
Number of transistors11,800 million25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology16 nm4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate336.683.17
Floating-point processing power10.77 TFLOPS5.323 TFLOPS
ROPs8016
TMUs20032
Ray Tracing Coresno data8

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).

InterfacePCIe 3.0 x4PCIe 4.0 x8
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
Supplementary power connectors2x 8-pinNone

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 typeGDDR5XSystem Shared
Maximum RAM amount5 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width320 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1376 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth440.3 GB/sno 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 ConnectorsNo outputsMotherboard Dependent

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model6.46.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.1
Vulkan1.2.1311.3
CUDA6.1-

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.

P102-100 8.01
Radeon 760M 13.21
+64.9%

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.

P102-100 3356
Radeon 760M 5535
+64.9%

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 HD18−20
−66.7%
30
+66.7%
1440p10−12
−80%
18
+80%

Cost per frame, $

1080p33.28no data
1440p59.90no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 105
+0%
105
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 30
+0%
30
+0%
Sons of the Forest 32
+0%
32
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 77
+0%
77
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 24
+0%
24
+0%
Far Cry 5 38
+0%
38
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Sons of the Forest 20
+0%
20
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 33
+0%
33
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 180−190
+0%
180−190
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 18
+0%
18
+0%
Dota 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 35
+0%
35
+0%
Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Forza Horizon 5 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 35
+0%
35
+0%
Metro Exodus 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Sons of the Forest 19
+0%
19
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 36
+0%
36
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Dota 2 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Far Cry 5 33
+0%
33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Sons of the Forest 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 23
+0%
23
+0%
Valorant 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 75−80
+0%
75−80
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 16
+0%
16
+0%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%
Valorant 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Sons of the Forest 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Valorant 70−75
+0%
70−75
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Dota 2 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Sons of the Forest 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

This is how P102-100 and Radeon 760M compete in popular games:

  • Radeon 760M is 67% faster in 1080p
  • Radeon 760M is 80% faster in 1440p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 65 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.01 13.21
Recency 12 February 2018 31 January 2024
Chip lithography 16 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 15 Watt

Radeon 760M has a 64.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 1566.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 760M is our recommended choice as it beats the P102-100 in performance tests.

Be aware that P102-100 is a workstation graphics card while Radeon 760M is a desktop one.

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 P102-100
P102-100
AMD Radeon 760M
Radeon 760M

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.


3.9 35 votes

Rate P102-100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 362 votes

Rate Radeon 760M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about P102-100 or Radeon 760M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.