GeForce GTX 295 vs Radeon R9 M270X
In this comparison between GeForce GTX 295 and Radeon R9 M270X you will find out which graphics card performs better in today's games. Bear in mind that third-party versions may have more efficient cooling and higher clock speeds. This will increase cards' performance, though not by much. In addition to raw power you should also take into account the dimensions. Thicker models simply will not fit into a small mini-ITX case. The resolution of your monitor also affects the choice, since 4K gameplay requires a more powerful GPU. And don't overspend on the graphics card. Other parts of your build may also need to be upgraded, save some money for the CPU or power supply. For some people GeForce GTX 295 will be the best choice, for others Radeon R9 M270X will be their preference. Study the comparison tables below and make your choice.
GeForce GTX 295
Radeon R9 M270X
Main Specs
| GeForce GTX 295 | Radeon R9 M270X | |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 289 Watt | |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Supplementary power connectors | 6-pin & 8-pin | |
| Memory type | GDDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1792 MB | 4 GB |
| Display Connectors | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI | No outputs |
- GeForce GTX 295 is connected by PCIe 2.0 x16, and Radeon R9 M270X uses PCIe 3.0 x16 interface.
- GeForce GTX 295 has 1788 GB more memory, than Radeon R9 M270X.
- Both cards are used in Desktops.
- GeForce GTX 295 is build with Tesla 2.0 architecture, and Radeon R9 M270X - with GCN 1.0.
- Core clock speed of GeForce GTX 295 is 517 MHz higher, than Radeon R9 M270X.
- GeForce GTX 295 is manufactured by 55 nm process technology, and Radeon R9 M270X - by 28 nm process technology.
- Memory clock speed of Radeon R9 M270X is 126 MHz higher, than GeForce GTX 295.
Game benchmarks
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 6−7 |
| ultra / 1080p | 2−3 | 4−5 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 16−18 |
| medium / 1080p | 5−6 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Assassin's Creed Odyssey is 50% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 10−12 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 10−11 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 18−20 | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | 8−9 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Battlefield 5 is 45% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | 30−35 | 45−50 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Call of Duty: Warzone is 17% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 120−130 | 130−140 |
| medium / 768p | 90−95 | 100−110 |
| ultra / 1080p | 40−45 | 50−55 |
| QHD / 1440p | 24−27 | 27−30 |
| 4K / 2160p | 18−20 | 27−30 |
| high / 768p | 65−70 | 75−80 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Counter-Strike: Global Offensive is 14% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 80−85 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 40−45 | 45−50 |
| The average gaming FPS of GeForce GTX 295 in Cyberpunk 2077 is 12% more, than Radeon R9 M270X. | ||
| low / 768p | 75−80 | 75−80 |
| medium / 768p | 50−55 | 55−60 |
| ultra / 1080p | 27−30 | 30−35 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Dota 2 is 5% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 5−6 | 8−9 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 7−8 |
| 4K / 2160p | 2−3 | 3−4 |
| low / 720p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| medium / 1080p | 6−7 | 8−9 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Far Cry 5 is 28% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 10−11 |
| low / 720p | 50−55 | 60−65 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 21−24 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Fortnite is 22% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 7−8 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | − | 10−12 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| low / 720p | 20−22 | 24−27 |
| medium / 1080p | 9−10 | 12−14 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Forza Horizon 4 is 41% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 45−50 | 50−55 |
| medium / 768p | − | 45−50 |
| high / 1080p | 8−9 | 12−14 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 6−7 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| medium / 720p | 40−45 | − |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Grand Theft Auto V is 20% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | 3−4 | 4−5 |
| ultra / 1080p | 1−2 | 3−4 |
| 4K / 2160p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 8−9 | 12−14 |
| medium / 1080p | 4−5 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Metro Exodus is 50% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 85−90 | 90−95 |
| high / 1080p | 85−90 | 85−90 |
| ultra / 1080p | 80−85 | 80−85 |
| medium / 1080p | 85−90 | 90−95 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Minecraft is 2% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| high / 1080p | − | 16−18 |
| ultra / 1080p | 12−14 | 14−16 |
| low / 720p | 27−30 | 30−35 |
| medium / 1080p | 14−16 | 18−20 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS is 22% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| ultra / 1080p | 7−8 | 7−8 |
| QHD / 1440p | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| low / 720p | 8−9 | 10−12 |
| medium / 1080p | − | 10−12 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in Red Dead Redemption 2 is 12% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 16−18 | 24−27 |
| medium / 768p | 12−14 | 16−18 |
| high / 1080p | 6−7 | 9−10 |
| ultra / 1080p | 5−6 | 6−7 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt is 40% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
| low / 768p | 70−75 | 85−90 |
| medium / 768p | 35−40 | 40−45 |
| ultra / 1080p | 16−18 | 18−20 |
| high / 768p | 30−35 | 35−40 |
| The average gaming FPS of Radeon R9 M270X in World of Tanks is 17% more, than GeForce GTX 295. | ||
Full Specs
| GeForce GTX 295 | Radeon R9 M270X | |
| Architecture | Tesla 2.0 | GCN 1.0 |
| Code name | GT200B | Venus |
| Type | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 8 January 2009 | 21 March 2014 |
| Pipelines | 240 | 640 |
| Core clock speed | 1242 MHz | 725 MHz |
| Boost Clock | 775 MHz | |
| Transistor count | 1,400 million | 1,500 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 28 nm |
| Texture fill rate | 92.2 billion/sec | 31.00 |
| Floating-point performance | 2x 596.2 gflops | 1,536 gflops |
| Length | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) | |
| Memory bus width | 896 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 999 MHz | 1125 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 223.8 GB/s | 72 GB/s |
| DirectX | 11.1 (10_0) | |
| Shader Model | 4.0 | 5.1 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | Not Listed |
| Vulkan | N/A | |
| CUDA | + | |
| FreeSync | + | |
| CUDA cores | 480 | |
| Bus support | PCIe 3.0 x16 | |
| Height | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) | |
| SLI options | + | |
| Multi monitor support | + | |
| HDMI | + | |
| Maximum VGA resolution | 2048x1536 | |
| Audio input for HDMI | S/PDIF | |
| Eyefinity | + | |
| HD3D | + | |
| PowerTune | + | |
| DualGraphics | + | |
| ZeroCore | + | |
| Switchable graphics | + | |
| Mantle | + | |
| Compute units | 10 | |
| CUDA cores per GPU | 240 | |
| Standard memory config per GPU | 896 MB | |
| Memory interface width per GPU | 448 Bit | |
| High Dynamic-Range Lighting (HDRR) | 128bit | |