GeForce GT 610 vs Radeon R7 265

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 265 and GeForce GT 610, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 265
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 150 Watt
10.41
+1185%

R7 265 outperforms GT 610 by a whopping 1185% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking4381144
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.270.01
Power efficiency4.761.91
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Fermi 2.0 (2010−2014)
GPU code namePitcairnGF119
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date13 February 2014 (10 years ago)2 April 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$149 $39.99

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 265 has 52600% better value for money than GT 610.

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 cores102448
Core clock speedno data810 MHz
Boost clock speed925 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,800 million292 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)150 Watt29 Watt
Maximum GPU temperatureno data102 °C
Texture fill rate59.206.480
Floating-point processing power1.894 TFLOPS0.1555 TFLOPS
ROPs324
TMUs648

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 3.0PCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 2.0 x16
Length210 mm145 mm
Heightno data2.7" (6.9 cm)
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-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 typeGDDR5DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB1024 MB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed1400 MHz1.8 GB/s
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s14.4 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortDual Link DVI-I, HDMI, VGA
Multi monitor supportno data+
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
HDCP-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536
Audio input for HDMIno dataInternal

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
3D Blu-Ray-+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model5.15.1
OpenGL4.64.2
OpenCL1.21.1
Vulkan-N/A
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.

R7 265 10.41
+1185%
GT 610 0.81

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.

R7 265 5220
+1311%
GT 610 370

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 10.41 0.81
Recency 13 February 2014 2 April 2012
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1024 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 150 Watt 29 Watt

R7 265 has a 1185.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 610, on the other hand, has 417.2% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 265 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 610 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.


AMD Radeon R7 265
Radeon R7 265
NVIDIA GeForce GT 610
GeForce GT 610

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.


3.1 373 votes

Rate Radeon R7 265 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 1962 votes

Rate GeForce GT 610 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.