GeForce GT 1030 vs Radeon R9 270X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 270X and GeForce GT 1030, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 270X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 180 Watt
10.90
+98.9%

R9 270X outperforms GT 1030 by an impressive 99% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking406588
Place by popularitynot in top-10026
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.052.31
Power efficiency4.8214.54
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)Pascal (2016−2021)
GPU code nameCuracaoGP108
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)17 May 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199 $79

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

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

R9 270X has 119% better value for money than GT 1030.

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 cores1280384
Core clock speedno data1228 MHz
Boost clock speed1050 MHz1468 MHz
Number of transistors2,800 million1,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)180 Watt30 Watt
Texture fill rate84.0035.23
Floating-point processing power2.688 TFLOPS1.127 TFLOPS
ROPs3216
TMUs8024

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 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x4
Lengthno data145 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors2 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1502 MHz
Memory bandwidth179.2 GB/s48.06 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++
DisplayPort support+-
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

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

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

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_1)
Shader Model5.16.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.21.2
Vulkan+1.2.131
CUDA-6.1

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.

R9 270X 10.90
+98.9%
GT 1030 5.48

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 270X 4875
+99%
GT 1030 2450

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 270X 6560
+81%
GT 1030 3625

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 HD45−50
+80%
25
−80%
1440p45−50
+80%
25
−80%
4K18−20
+80%
10
−80%

Cost per frame, $

1080p4.42
−39.9%
3.16
+39.9%
1440p4.42
−39.9%
3.16
+39.9%
4K11.06
−39.9%
7.90
+39.9%
  • GT 1030 has 40% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • GT 1030 has 40% lower cost per frame in 1440p
  • GT 1030 has 40% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Atomic Heart 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+132%
27−30
−132%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+60%
15
−60%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Atomic Heart 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+67.7%
31
−67.7%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+132%
27−30
−132%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+118%
11
−118%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+111%
19
−111%
Fortnite 65−70
+46.8%
47
−46.8%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+88.9%
27
−88.9%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+118%
17
−118%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+53.6%
28
−53.6%
Valorant 100−110
−44.8%
152
+44.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Atomic Heart 30−33
+114%
14−16
−114%
Battlefield 5 50−55
+100%
26
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 65−70
+132%
27−30
−132%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 170−180
+71.7%
95−100
−71.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+243%
7
−243%
Dota 2 80−85
+66.7%
45−50
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+135%
17
−135%
Fortnite 65−70
+91.7%
36
−91.7%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+113%
24
−113%
Forza Horizon 5 35−40
+185%
13
−185%
Grand Theft Auto V 45−50
+55.2%
29
−55.2%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+243%
7
−243%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+79.2%
24
−79.2%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+52.4%
21
−52.4%
Valorant 100−110
−17.1%
123
+17.1%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+160%
20
−160%
Cyberpunk 2077 24−27
+100%
12−14
−100%
Dota 2 80−85
+66.7%
45−50
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 40−45
+167%
15
−167%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+219%
16
−219%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 40−45
+169%
16
−169%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+167%
12
−167%
Valorant 100−110
+650%
14
−650%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 65−70
+176%
25
−176%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24
+144%
9−10
−144%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 85−90
+93.5%
45−50
−93.5%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+157%
7−8
−157%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+180%
5−6
−180%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 85−90
+138%
35−40
−138%
Valorant 120−130
+91%
65−70
−91%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 30−35
+256%
9−10
−256%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+117%
12−14
−117%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+107%
14−16
−107%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+111%
9−10
−111%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 24−27
+117%
12−14
−117%

4K
High Preset

Atomic Heart 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Grand Theft Auto V 21−24
+91.7%
12
−91.7%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+700%
1−2
−700%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+400%
3−4
−400%
Valorant 60−65
+113%
30−33
−113%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+1500%
1
−1500%
Counter-Strike 2 7−8
+133%
3−4
−133%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+100%
2−3
−100%
Dota 2 40−45
+105%
21−24
−105%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+100%
6−7
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 20−22
+186%
7
−186%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 10−12
+83.3%
6−7
−83.3%

This is how R9 270X and GT 1030 compete in popular games:

  • R9 270X is 80% faster in 1080p
  • R9 270X is 80% faster in 1440p
  • R9 270X is 80% faster in 4K

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Battlefield 5, with 4K resolution and the Ultra Preset, the R9 270X is 1500% faster.
  • in Valorant, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the GT 1030 is 45% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R9 270X is ahead in 59 tests (97%)
  • GT 1030 is ahead in 2 tests (3%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.90 5.48
Recency 8 October 2013 17 May 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 180 Watt 30 Watt

R9 270X has a 98.9% higher aggregate performance score.

GT 1030, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 500% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 270X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GT 1030 in performance tests.

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 R9 270X
Radeon R9 270X
NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030
GeForce GT 1030

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.


4 762 votes

Rate Radeon R9 270X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 8152 votes

Rate GeForce GT 1030 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R9 270X or GeForce GT 1030, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.