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

1. KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost

9 Reasons why KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost is better

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

KFA2 GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost
Yesvs No (Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC)
KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost
Tags:
KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost specs
KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost features
KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost pros and cons
KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost advantages
KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost disadvantages

2. Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC

24 Reasons why Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC is better

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

1.Significantly faster GPU clock speed
1100MHzvs 980MHz (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
The graphics processing unit (GPU) has a higher clock speed.
2.Considerably higher floating-point performance
2.816TFLOPSvs 1.505TFLOPS (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
Floating-point performance is a measurement of the raw processing power of the GPU.
3.Significantly higher pixel rate
35.2GPixel/svs 15.7GPixel/s (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
The number of pixels that can be rendered to the screen every second.
4.Significantly more shading units
1280vs 768 (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
Shading units (or stream processors) are small processors within the graphics card that are responsible for processing different aspects of the image.
5.Sizably higher texture rate
88GTexels/svs 62.7GTexels/s (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
The number of textured pixels that can be rendered to the screen every second.
6.Distinctly more memory bandwidth
192GB/svs 144GB/s (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
This is the maximum rate that data can be read from or stored into memory.
7.Notably more texture mapping units (TMUs)
80vs 64 (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
TMUs take textures and map them to the geometry of a 3D scene. More TMUs will typically mean that texture information is processed faster.
8.Noticeably more transistors
2800 millionvs 2540 million (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
A higher transistor count generally indicates a newer, more powerful processor.
9.Notably newer version of DirectX
11.2vs 11 (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
DirectX is used in games, with newer versions supporting better graphics.
10.Sizably wider memory bus width
256bitvs 192bit (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
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.
11.Significantly newer version of OpenCL
1.2vs 1.1 (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
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.
12.Significantly higher 3DMark Vantage Texture Fill result
75.7GTexels/svs 46.1GTexels/s (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
This benchmark is designed to measure graphics performance. Source: AnandTech.
13.Appreciably faster GPU turbo speed
1150MHzvs 1032MHz (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
When the GPU is running below its limitations, it can boost to a higher clock speed in order to give increased performance.
14.Sizably more render output units (ROPs)
32vs 24 (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
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.
15.Measurably higher 3DMark Vantage Pixel Fill result
9GPixel/svs 5.3GPixel/s (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
This benchmark is designed to measure graphics performance. Source: AnandTech.
16.Measurably more DVI outputs
2vs 1 (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
Allows you to connect to a display using DVI.
17.Significantly more DisplayPort outputs
1vs 0 (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
Allows you to connect to a display using DisplayPort.
18.Significantly higher PassMark (G3D) result
4482vs 3514 (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
This benchmark measures the graphics performance of a video card. Source: PassMark.
19.Substantially higher PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2363vs 1621 (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
This benchmark measures the general purpose computational power of a graphics card. Source: PassMark.
20.Noticeably lower power consumption whilst under peak load
239Wvs 261W (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
21.Significantly lower idle noise level
40dBvs 40.1dB (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
The level of noise when it is not in use.
22.Sizably lower power consumption whilst idle
78Wvs 107W (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
23.Explicitly higher Battlefield 3 (1920x1080) result
53.6FPSvs 36.5FPS (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
This benchmark measures the performance of the graphics card using Battlefield 3 (1920x1080 - Ultra Quality + 4x MSAA). Source: AnandTech.
24.Distinctly higher Crysis: Warhead (1920x1200) result
48.4FPSvs 23.7FPS (KFA² GeForce GTX 650 Ti Boost)
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
Tags:
Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC specs
Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC features
Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC pros and cons
Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC advantages
Sapphire Toxic R9 270X OC disadvantages