GeForce 7300 GS vs Radeon R9 Fury

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R9 Fury and GeForce 7300 GS, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R9 Fury
2015
4 GB High Bandwidth Memory (HBM), 275 Watt
24.85
+12325%

R9 Fury outperforms 7300 GS by a whopping 12325% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking2221393
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.16no data
Power efficiency6.230.60
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Curie (2003−2013)
GPU code nameFijiG72
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Release date10 July 2015 (9 years ago)18 January 2006 (19 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores3584no data
Compute units56no data
Core clock speedno data450 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors8,900 million112 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm90 nm
Power consumption (TDP)275 Watt23 Watt
Texture fill rate224.01.800
Floating-point processing power7.168 TFLOPSno data
ROPs642
TMUs2244

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 1.0 x16
Width2-slot1-slot
Supplementary power connectors​2x 8-pinNone
Bridgeless CrossFire+-

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 typeHigh Bandwidth Memory (HBM)DDR2
High bandwidth memory (HBM)+no data
Maximum RAM amount4 GB256 MB
Memory bus width4096 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed500 MHz266 MHz
Memory bandwidth512 GB/s4.256 GB/s
Shared memory-no data

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 Connectors1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x VGA, 1x S-Video
Eyefinity+-
Number of Eyefinity displays6no data
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration+-
CrossFire+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
LiquidVR+-
PowerTune+-
TressFX+-
TrueAudio+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 129.0c (9_3)
Shader Model6.33.0
OpenGL4.52.1
OpenCL2.0N/A
Vulkan+N/A
Mantle+-

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 Fury 24.85
+12325%
7300 GS 0.20

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 Fury 9555
+12150%
7300 GS 78

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 HD890−1
1440p970−1
4K49-0−1

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.17no data
1440p5.66no data
4K11.20no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 0−1
Elden Ring 80−85 0−1

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 0−1
Metro Exodus 65−70 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55 0−1
Valorant 100−105 0−1

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 0−1
Dota 2 85−90 0−1
Elden Ring 80−85 0−1
Far Cry 5 75−80 0−1
Fortnite 120−130
+12400%
1−2
−12400%
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 85−90 0−1
Metro Exodus 65−70 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+15500%
1−2
−15500%
Red Dead Redemption 2 50−55 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 76 0−1
Valorant 100−105 0−1
World of Tanks 268
+13300%
2−3
−13300%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 75−80 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 45−50 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 50−55 0−1
Dota 2 130
+12900%
1−2
−12900%
Far Cry 5 101 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 100−110 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 150−160
+15500%
1−2
−15500%
Valorant 100−105 0−1

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 40−45 0−1
Elden Ring 40−45 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 40−45 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 170−180
+17400%
1−2
−17400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24 0−1
World of Tanks 158
+15700%
1−2
−15700%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 21−24 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 21−24 0−1
Far Cry 5 70−75 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 65−70 0−1
Metro Exodus 55−60 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40 0−1
Valorant 65−70 0−1

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 21−24 0−1
Dota 2 47 0−1
Elden Ring 20−22 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 47 0−1
Metro Exodus 18−20 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 75−80 0−1
Red Dead Redemption 2 16−18 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 47 0−1
World of Tanks 109 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 21−24 0−1
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9 0−1
Dota 2 102 0−1
Far Cry 5 38 0−1
Fortnite 35 0−1
Forza Horizon 4 35−40 0−1
Valorant 30−35 0−1

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 24.85 0.20
Recency 10 July 2015 18 January 2006
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 256 MB
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 275 Watt 23 Watt

R9 Fury has a 12325% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 1500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

7300 GS, on the other hand, has 1095.7% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R9 Fury is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce 7300 GS 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 R9 Fury
Radeon R9 Fury
NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GS
GeForce 7300 GS

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.


3.8 175 votes

Rate Radeon R9 Fury on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 86 votes

Rate GeForce 7300 GS 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.