GeForce GTS 160M vs Radeon R9 A375
If you are going to buy a new graphics card and are choosing between GeForce GTS 160M and Radeon R9 A375, there are a couple of things to consider. Cards with more VRAM in general perform better and allow you to play on higher graphics settings. Size also makes a difference. A model with a large heatsink can occupy up to three expansion slots on a motherboard. Be sure you have enough room in your PC case. When comparing GPUs with different architectures, more processing cores and even higher TFLOPS will not always translate to better performance. To help you decide which GPU you need, we have measured frame rates in a number of popular games. For more on how the GeForce GTS 160M stacks up against Radeon R9 A375, check out specs charts below.
Radeon R9 A375
GeForce GTS 160M is a Laptop Graphics Card
Note: GeForce GTS 160M is only used in laptop graphics. It has lower GPU clock speed compared to the desktop variant, which results in lower power consumption, but also 10-30% lower gaming performance. Check available laptop models with GeForce GTS 160M here:
Main Specs
GeForce GTS 160M | Radeon R9 A375 | |
Power consumption (TDP) | 60 Watt | |
Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 2 GB |
Display Connectors | No outputs | No outputs |
Check Price |
- GeForce GTS 160M is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and Radeon R9 A375 uses PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
- Radeon R9 A375 has 1 GB more memory, than GeForce GTS 160M.
- GeForce GTS 160M is used in Laptops, and Radeon R9 A375 - in Desktops.
- GeForce GTS 160M is build with G9x architecture, and Radeon R9 A375 - with GCN 1.0.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTS 160M is 600 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 A375.
- GeForce GTS 160M is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and Radeon R9 A375 - by 28 nm process technology.
Game benchmarks
high / 1080p | 0−1 | 2−3 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 1−2 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 1−2 | 12−14 |
medium / 1080p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 A375 in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 1200% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
ultra / 1080p | − | 5−6 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 0−1 | 16−18 |
medium / 1080p | − | 6−7 |
low / 768p | 50−55 | 50−55 |
high / 1080p | 45−50 | 40−45 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTS 160M in Call of Duty: Warzone is 6% more, than Radeon R9 A375. | ||
low / 768p | 60−65 | 120−130 |
medium / 768p | 27−30 | 95−100 |
ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 40−45 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 21−24 |
4K / 2160p | − | 16−18 |
high / 768p | 16−18 | 65−70 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 A375 in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 196% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
low / 768p | 70−75 | 65−70 |
ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 20−22 |
medium / 1080p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTS 160M in Cyberpunk 2077 is 5% more, than Radeon R9 A375. | ||
low / 768p | 45−50 | 75−80 |
medium / 768p | 10−11 | 45−50 |
ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 21−24 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 A375 in Dota 2 is 113% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
high / 1080p | − | 2−3 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 2−3 |
4K / 2160p | − | 2−3 |
low / 720p | 0−1 | 10−12 |
medium / 1080p | − | 4−5 |
high / 1080p | − | 10−11 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 5−6 |
QHD / 1440p | − | 4−5 |
low / 720p | 21−24 | 50−55 |
medium / 1080p | 0−1 | 10−12 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 A375 in Fortnite is 136% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
high / 1080p | 0−1 | 5−6 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 3−4 |
4K / 2160p | − | 2−3 |
low / 720p | 0−1 | 18−20 |
medium / 1080p | 0−1 | 8−9 |
low / 768p | 18−20 | 45−50 |
high / 1080p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 2−3 |
QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
medium / 720p | 12−14 | 35−40 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 A375 in Grand Theft Auto V is 162% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
high / 1080p | − | 2−3 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 0−1 |
4K / 2160p | − | 0−1 |
low / 720p | 0−1 | 4−5 |
medium / 1080p | − | 3−4 |
low / 768p | 75−80 | 85−90 |
high / 1080p | 27−30 | 80−85 |
4K / 2160p | − | 75−80 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 A375 in Minecraft is 60% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
ultra / 1080p | − | 12−14 |
low / 720p | 8−9 | 27−30 |
medium / 1080p | − | 14−16 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 A375 in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 250% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. | ||
low / 720p | 0−1 | 6−7 |
low / 768p | 0−1 | 10−11 |
medium / 768p | − | 8−9 |
high / 1080p | − | 4−5 |
ultra / 1080p | − | 4−5 |
4K / 2160p | − | 1−2 |
low / 768p | 45−50 | 75−80 |
medium / 768p | 14−16 | 35−40 |
ultra / 1080p | 0−1 | 14−16 |
high / 768p | 12−14 | 30−33 |
The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 A375 in World of Tanks is 92% more, than GeForce GTS 160M. |
Full Specs
GeForce GTS 160M | Radeon R9 A375 | |
Architecture | G9x | GCN 1.0 |
Code name | N10E-GS1 | Venus |
Type | Laptop | Desktop |
Release date | 2 March 2009 | no data |
Pipelines | 64 | 640 |
Core clock speed | 1500 MHz | 900 MHz |
Boost Clock | 925 MHz | |
Transistor count | 505 million | 1,500 million |
Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
Texture fill rate | 19 billion/sec | 37.00 |
Floating-point performance | 192 gflops | |
Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 128 Bit |
Memory clock speed | 4.5 GB/s | |
Memory bandwidth | 51 GB/s | 72 GB/s |
Shared memory | - | |
DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | 12 (11_1) |
Shader Model | 4.0 | 5.1 |
OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
OpenCL | 1.1 | 1.2 |
Vulkan | N/A | 1.2 |
CUDA | + | |
CUDA cores | 64 | |
Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | |
SLI options | 2-way | |
HDMI | + | |
Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | |
Laptop size | large | |
Gigaflops | 288 | |
MXM Type | MXM 3.0 Type-B | |
Power management | 8.0 | |
Check Price |
Similar compares
- GeForce GTS 160M vs UHD Graphics 615
- GeForce GTS 160M vs Radeon HD 8730M
- Radeon R9 A375 vs UHD Graphics 615
- Radeon R9 A375 vs Radeon HD 8730M
- GeForce GTS 160M vs Radeon HD 8550G plus HD 8750M Dual Graphics
- GeForce GTS 160M vs Quadro 3000M
- Radeon R9 A375 vs Radeon HD 8550G plus HD 8750M Dual Graphics
- Radeon R9 A375 vs Quadro 3000M