Top Nine Reasons for the KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

Top 25 Reasons for the Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC

 
 
Which is better? Show result
0
0

KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost vs Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC

Top Nine Reasons for the

KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

Compared to Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC

KFA2 GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost
Yes
vs
No
Top 9 Reasons for KFA2 GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost
55
A little bit higher effective memory clock speed
Comment
6008MHz
vs
6000MHz
8MHz higher effective memory clock speed. The effective memory clock speed is calculated from the size and data rate of the memory. Higher clock speeds can give increased performance in games and other applications.

×

48
Distinctly lower TDP
Comment
134W
vs
180W
46W lower TDP. The thermal design power (TDP) is the maximum amount of power the cooling system needs to dissipate. A lower TDP typically means that it consumes less power.

×

44
Slightly faster memory clock speed
Comment
1502MHz
vs
1500MHz
2MHz faster memory clock speed. The memory clock speed is one aspect that determines the memory bandwidth.

×

35
Distinctly lower load GPU temperature
Comment
56°C
vs
76°C
20°C lower load GPU temperature. A lower load temperature means that the card produces less heat and its cooling system performs better.

×

31
Lots lower idle GPU temperature
Comment
28°C
vs
30°C
2°C lower idle GPU temperature. A lower idle temperature means that the card produces less heat and its cooling system performs better.

×

31
Shorter
Comment
111mm
vs
120mm
9mm shorter

×

31
Vastly lower load noise level
Comment
40.1dB
vs
51.6dB
11.50dB lower load noise level. The level of noise when under a heavy workload.

×

31
Sizably narrower
Comment
241mm
vs
308mm
67mm narrower

×

26
Has Double Precision Floating Point (DPFP)
Comment
Yes
vs
No
This is useful when using the GPU for general-purpose computing (GPGPU) such as scientific research, as it provides a higher degree of precision when making calculations.

×

KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost is better than Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC because...

Yes
vs
No

Please choose the related object

Top 25 Reasons for the

Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC

Compared to KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

334
Considerably faster GPU clock speed
Comment
1100MHz
vs
980MHz
120MHz faster GPU clock speed. The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a higher clock speed.

×

197
Notably higher floating-point performance
Comment
2.816TFLOPS
vs
1.505TFLOPS
1.31TFLOPS higher floating-point performance. Floating-point performance is a measurement of the raw processing power of the GPU.

×

141
Newer version of DirectX
Comment
11.2
vs
11
Newer version of DirectX. DirectX is used in games, with newer versions supporting better graphics.

×

121
Significantly higher pixel rate
Comment
35.2GPixel/s
vs
15.7GPixel/s
19.50GPixel/s higher pixel rate. The number of pixels that can be rendered to the screen every second.

×

73
Newer version of OpenCL
Comment
1.2
vs
1.1
Newer version of OpenCL. Some applications use OpenCL to utilise the power of the graphics processing unit (GPU) for non-graphical computing. Newer versions introduce more functionality and better performance.

×

44
Notably more shading units
Comment
1280
vs
768
512 more shading units. Shading units (or stream processors) are small processors within the graphics card that are responsible for processing different aspects of the image.

×

40
Clearly higher texture rate
Comment
88GTexels/s
vs
62.7GTexels/s
25.30GTexels/s higher texture rate. The number of textured pixels that can be rendered to the screen every second.

×

39
Noticeably more texture mapping units (TMUs)
Comment
80
vs
64
16 more texture mapping units (TMUs). TMUs take textures and map them to the geometry of a 3D scene. More TMUs will typically mean that texture information is processed faster.

×

38
Much more RAM memory
Comment
4.096GB
vs
2.048GB
2.05GB more RAM memory

×

37
Significantly more memory bandwidth
Comment
192GB/s
vs
144GB/s
48GB/s more memory bandwidth. This is the maximum rate that data can be read from or stored into memory.

×

37
Notably more transistors
Comment
2800 million
vs
2540 million
260million more transistors. A higher transistor count generally indicates a newer, more powerful processor.

×

36
Noticeably higher 3DMark Vantage Texture Fill result
Comment
75.7GTexels/s
vs
46.1GTexels/s
29.60GTexels/s higher 3DMark Vantage Texture Fill result. This benchmark is designed to measure graphics performance. Source: AnandTech.

×

36
Significantly wider memory bus width
Comment
256bit
vs
192bit
64bit wider memory bus width. A wider bus width means that it can carry more data per cycle. It is an important factor of memory performance, and therefore the general performance of the graphics card.

×

34
Significantly higher 3DMark Vantage Pixel Fill result
Comment
9GPixel/s
vs
5.3GPixel/s
3.70GPixel/s higher 3DMark Vantage Pixel Fill result. This benchmark is designed to measure graphics performance. Source: AnandTech.

×

34
Significantly faster GPU turbo speed
Comment
1150MHz
vs
1032MHz
118MHz faster GPU turbo speed. When the GPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.

×

33
Notably more render output units (ROPs)
Comment
32
vs
24
8 more render output units (ROPs). The ROPs are responsible for some of the final steps of the rendering process, writing the final pixel data to memory and carrying out other tasks such as anti-aliasing to improve the look of graphics.

×

32
Vastly more DisplayPort outputs
Comment
1
vs
0
1 more DisplayPort outputs. Allows you to connect to a display using DisplayPort.

×

31
Clearly more DVI outputs
Comment
2
vs
1
1 more DVI outputs. Allows you to connect to a display using DVI.

×

31
Vastly higher PassMark (G3D) result
Comment
4482
vs
3514
968 higher PassMark (G3D) result. This benchmark measures the graphics performance of a video card. Source: PassMark.

×

31
Significantly lower power consumption whilst under peak load
Comment
239W
vs
261W
22W lower power consumption whilst under peak load

×

30
Noticeably higher PassMark (DirectCompute) result
Comment
2363
vs
1621
742 higher PassMark (DirectCompute) result. This benchmark measures the general purpose computational power of a graphics card. Source: PassMark.

×

29
Vastly lower power consumption whilst idle
Comment
78W
vs
107W
29W lower power consumption whilst idle

×

28
A bit lower idle noise level
Comment
40dB
vs
40.1dB
0.10dB lower idle noise level. The level of noise when it is not in use.

×

26
Distinctly higher Battlefield 3 (1920x1080) result
Comment
53.6FPS
vs
36.5FPS
17.10FPS higher Battlefield 3 (1920x1080) result. This benchmark measures the performance of the graphics card using Battlefield 3 (1920x1080 - Ultra Quality + 4x MSAA). Source: AnandTech.

×

25
Sizably higher Crysis: Warhead (1920x1200) result
Comment
48.4FPS
vs
23.7FPS
24.70FPS higher Crysis: Warhead (1920x1200) result. This benchmark measures the performance of the graphics card using Crysis: Warhead (1920x1200 - Frost Bench - Enthusiast Quality + 4xAA). Source: AnandTech.

×

Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC is better than KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost because...

Yes
vs
No

Please choose the related object

x
Join