GeForce GTX 480 vs Radeon R9 270

Place in the ranking	423	431
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	5.08	1.67
Power efficiency	5.15	2.95
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code name	Curacao	GF100
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	13 November 2013 (11 years ago)	26 March 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$179	$499

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R9 270 has 204% better value for money than GTX 480.

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 cores	1280	480
Core clock speed	no data	700 MHz
Boost clock speed	925 MHz	no data
Number of transistors	2,800 million	3,100 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	250 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	no data	105 °C
Texture fill rate	74.00	42.06
Floating-point processing power	2.368 TFLOPS	1.345 TFLOPS
ROPs	32	48
TMUs	80	60

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 support	PCIe 3.0	16x PCI-E 2.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 2.0 x16
Length	210 mm	267 mm
Height	no data	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 6-pin	1x 6-pin + 1x 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 type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1536 MB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	no data	1848 MHz (3696 data rate)
Memory bandwidth	179.2 GB/s	177.4 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 Connectors	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	Two Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI
Multi monitor support	no data	+
Eyefinity	+	-
HDMI	+	+
HDCP	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
DisplayPort support	+	-
Audio input for HDMI	no data	Internal

Supported technologies

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

CrossFire	+	-
FreeSync	+	-
HD3D	+	-
LiquidVR	+	-
TressFX	+	-
TrueAudio	+	-
UVD	+	-
DDMA audio	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 (11_0)
Shader Model	5.1	5.1
OpenGL	4.6	4.2
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
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.

R9 270 11.20
+4.6%

GTX 480 10.71

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.

R9 270 4306
+4.6%

GTX 480 4115

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.

R9 270 5930
+62.5%

GTX 480 3650

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Valorant	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Dota 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Fortnite	60−65 +0%	60−65 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Valorant	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
World of Tanks	150−160 +0%	150−160 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Dota 2	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +0%	80−85 +0%
Valorant	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
World of Tanks	75−80 +0%	75−80 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	16−18 +0%	16−18 +0%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Valorant	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Dota 2	21−24 +0%	21−24 +0%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Fortnite	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Forza Horizon 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Valorant	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 64 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	11.20	10.71
Recency	13 November 2013	26 March 2010
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1536 MB
Chip lithography	28 nm	40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	150 Watt	250 Watt

R9 270 has a 4.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 33.3% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 66.7% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R9 270 and GeForce GTX 480.

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