Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

GeForce GTX 760 Review: GK104 Shows Up (And Off) At $250

GeForce GTX 760 Review: GK104 Shows Up (And Off) At $250
By , Igor Wallossek

With its last graphics card introduction until the end of Fall, Nvidia isn't trying to impress anyone with groundbreaking performance. Rather, the company is pulling better-than GeForce GTX 660 Ti-class frame rates to a $250 price point, creating value.

In the last four months, we watched Nvidia revamp its high-end graphics card line-up using year-old GPUs based on the Kepler architecture. Hey, I’m not hating. GK110 wasn’t even available to desktop gamers prior to the GeForce GTX Titan’s introduction. And while I wasn’t a huge fan of GeForce GTX 780, I certainly “got” the reason for a cut-back version of the $1000 flagship. GeForce GTX 770 was a more practical introduction, replacing GeForce GTX 680 with a little extra speed at a dramatically lower price—and the rebranded GK104-based board earned our Smart Buy award as a result.

And now we have another graphics card based on GK104 to test: the GeForce GTX 760. In case you’re counting, that makes an astounding six models based on one GPU (GeForce GTX 690, 680, 670, 660 Ti, 770, and now the 760). Talk about getting your mileage worth.

Of course, those six boards utilize GK104 in varying configurations, from its full 1536 CUDA cores down to 1344. Actually, there was an OEM-only GeForce GTX 660 that Nvidia launched last year with 1152 CUDA cores (or just six of the GPU’s eight total SMX blocks) enabled...

GK104 Rides Again

...and that’s the arrangement being introduced today. Nvidia enables six of GK104’s eight Streaming Multiprocessors across three or four of its Graphics Processing Clusters. This is similar to the approach taken on GeForce GTX 780, equipped with a trimmed GK110 GPU. In essence, the company doesn’t always know which of its chips’ resources are going to be defective. So, it can turn off two SMXes in one GPC or one SMX in two different GPCs. 

In GeForce GTX 760, GK104 looks like this...In GeForce GTX 760, GK104 looks like this......or this. Either way, two SMXes are disabled....or this. Either way, two SMXes are disabled.

In either case, you end up with 1152 total CUDA cores and 96 texture units. GK104’s back-end remains intact though, consisting of four ROP clusters that output eight 32-bit integer pixels per clock each, maxing out at 32. Similarly, four 64-bit memory controllers create a 256-bit aggregate interface.

At least at first, GeForce GTX 760s will sport 2 GB of GDDR5 memory operating at 1502 MHz, just like the GeForce GTX 670 and 680, pushing up to 192.2 GB/s. This is probably the 760's biggest advantage against GeForce GTX 660 Ti. A 192-bit memory bus limits that card's bandwidth to 144.2 GB/s, which hurts at higher resolutions with anti-aliasing cranked up.

GeForce GTX 760 also compensates for a less-complex GPU configuration through higher core clock rates. Its GK104 runs at 980 MHz (base), but is rated for a GPU Boost clock rate of 1033 MHz. That’s more aggressive than GeForce GTX 660 Ti and 670, both armed with 1344-shader incarnations of GK104 set at a 915 MHz base frequency. What you're going to see in the benchmarks is that some workloads tend to favor shader count, others react to the GPU's clock rate, and a third group enjoys memory bandwidth.

Meet Nvidia’s Reference GeForce GTX 760

I really grew to admire the GeForce GTX 770 that Nvidia sent over for review. The reference design featured the same sleek thermal solution as GeForce GTX Titan on a product I could actually afford. But Nvidia’s board partners deviated from that configuration unanimously, going to market mostly with two-or three-fan coolers, which I frankly don’t care for as much.

It looks like the same thing is going to happen with GeForce GTX 760. The reference card appears identical to GeForce GTX 670. We also received four partner boards, though, and they all lean on proprietary heat sink and fan combinations. This doesn’t bother me so much. Whereas I was a big fan of the 770’s aluminum shroud, polycarbonate window, and heat-exhausting centrifugal fan, the 760’s plastic cooler isn’t as hard to part ways with.  

Nevertheless, the reference GeForce GTX 760 is 9.5” long; its PCB only accounts for 6.75” of that. Nvidia claims that the 760’s scaled-back power requirements allowed it to move voltage regulation circuitry to the other (left) side of the GPU.

We remain fans of centrifugal blowers for their ability to push waste heat out of your case, rather than recirculating it. Unfortunately, board partners seem less concerned about this, and are using axial fans able to spin more quietly at the expense of carefully directed cooling.

Despite its two deactivated SMXes, GeForce GTX 760 sports the same 170 W maximum graphics card power rating as GeForce GTX 670. That’s 25 W less than GeForce GTX 680 and 60 W less than the more recently-introduced GeForce GTX 770, both of which employ the same GK104 processor. Since a 16-lane PCI Express slot only delivers 75 W of power, you still need two six-pin auxiliary connectors to drive the GTX 760.

The 760 offers the same four display outputs seen on all of Nvidia’s other 600- and 700-series cards lately: two dual-link DVI connectors (one DVI-I and one DVI-D), one full-sized HDMI output, and one full-sized DisplayPort connector. All four can be active simultaneously, partly addressing AMD’s Eyefinity technology, which we’ve seen enable up to six screens on one card.

Display 147 Comments.
Top Comments
  • 21 Hide
    tomfreak , June 25, 2013 6:49 AM
    GTX760 is an upgrade for GTX460/560 user and of all of that u didnt throw in those cards to bench with. Seriously?
  • 12 Hide
    pauldh , June 25, 2013 6:37 AM
    Quote:
    This doesn't look faster than the 7950 boost to me. Maybe you should check your scores and update your conclusion to reflect reality?


    Re-read the conclusion in question below. He doesn't say it is faster, he says this card will replace Don's recommendation for best $250 card and displace the 7950 Boost. ie. Don won't be recommending a $300 card that trades blows or barely beats a $250 card. If both were to end up $250, things change.

    quote - "A quick reference to Best Graphics Cards For The Money: June 2013 shows that Don is currently recommending the Tahiti-based Radeon HD 7870 for $250. With almost certainty, the GeForce GTX 760 will take that honor next month, displacing the Radeon HD 7950 with Boost at $300 in the process."
Other Comments
  • 5 Hide
    SiliconWars , June 25, 2013 6:18 AM
    This doesn't look faster than the 7950 boost to me. Maybe you should check your scores and update your conclusion to reflect reality?
  • 5 Hide
    TheBigTroll , June 25, 2013 6:28 AM
    it isnt supposed to be faster than the 7950. they are about the same
  • 12 Hide
    pauldh , June 25, 2013 6:37 AM
    Quote:
    This doesn't look faster than the 7950 boost to me. Maybe you should check your scores and update your conclusion to reflect reality?


    Re-read the conclusion in question below. He doesn't say it is faster, he says this card will replace Don's recommendation for best $250 card and displace the 7950 Boost. ie. Don won't be recommending a $300 card that trades blows or barely beats a $250 card. If both were to end up $250, things change.

    quote - "A quick reference to Best Graphics Cards For The Money: June 2013 shows that Don is currently recommending the Tahiti-based Radeon HD 7870 for $250. With almost certainty, the GeForce GTX 760 will take that honor next month, displacing the Radeon HD 7950 with Boost at $300 in the process."
  • 0 Hide
    mapesdhs , June 25, 2013 6:44 AM

    Chris, what is it about the GTX 580 that makes it so slow for the CUDA Fluidmark
    test, given it does so well for the other CUDA tests, especially iRay and Blender?

    Btw, I don't suppose you could include 580 SLI results for the game tests? ;) 
    Or do you have just the one 580?


    My only gripe with the 760 is the misuse of a model number which allows one to
    infer it should be quicker than older cards with 'lesser' names (660, etc.) when
    infact it's often slower. I really wish NVIDIA would stop releasing products that
    exhibit such enormous performance overlap. Given the evolutionary nature of
    GPUs, and the time that has passed since the 600s launched, one might
    reasonably expect a 760 to beat the 670 too, but it never does. To me, the
    price drop is the only thing it has going for it. The endless meddling with shader
    numbers, clocks, bus width, etc., creates an utter muddle of performance
    response depending on the game. One really has to judge based on the
    individual game rather than any general product description or spec summary.
    I just hope Skyrim players with 660s don't upgrade on the assumption newer
    model names mean better performance, but I expect some will.

    Ian.

  • 21 Hide
    tomfreak , June 25, 2013 6:49 AM
    GTX760 is an upgrade for GTX460/560 user and of all of that u didnt throw in those cards to bench with. Seriously?
  • 4 Hide
    Novuake , June 25, 2013 6:51 AM
    Nice review as per usual Chris.
    Amazing performance at 250$. The 265bit memory interface does wonders for GK104.

    Now I am wondering if there will even be a GTX760ti, while there is a large enough gap in the product stack, I have a feeling there is a chance there may not be a "ti" version.
    Anyone know more?
  • 0 Hide
    sarinaide , June 25, 2013 7:02 AM
    AMD will have to release a new interim Radeon series, the existing family is not to outdated to be stretched to much longer.
  • 0 Hide
    Mousemonkey , June 25, 2013 7:10 AM
    For those of us who fold it ain't no show stopper is it? :lol: 
  • 0 Hide
    horaciopz , June 25, 2013 7:12 AM
    So, maybe there will be an GTX 760 ti, for about 300 bucks with the peformance of a GTX 670... Uh? nVidia really should. This remembers the gtx 400 series and 500 series... nVidia is doing it all over again.
  • 0 Hide
    mapesdhs , June 25, 2013 7:15 AM
    tomfreak, two good 460s are somewhat less than a single 670 (VRAM limits not
    withstanding), while two 560s will be similar since they're just oc'd 460s and
    most of them had slower clocks than the best 460s. Two 560Tis can be usefully
    better, matching a 670, or even matching a 680 if oc'd, but again VRAM capacity
    may be an issue, though for all these older cards there were 2GB versions
    available (but often with slower clocks; I have two oc'd 2GB 460s @ 800MHz
    which run quite well). My gaming PC still has two 900MHz 1GB 560TIs which are
    quicker than a 670 at stock, quicker than a 680 oc'd, at least when the 1GB limit
    is not an issue. They certainly cope with Crysis2 at high detail well enough.

    However, comparing to these newer 600/700 cards, the only older cards that
    do still perform well by comparison (by that I mean the potential gain from SLI)
    are the 570/580, again assuming VRAM capacity is not a factor, though the
    3GB 580 definitely shines here. Indeed, two 580s SLI are almost identical in
    performance to a single 780 for 3DMark11, eg. see:

    http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5516/nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-2gb-video-card-review/index4.html

    Here are my 3DMark11 results for two 797MHz 1.5GB 580s:

    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/6683648
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/6683683

    If you want lots more 460/560 data, see my site:

    http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/sgi.html#PC

    Ian.

    PS. I don't include the 470/480 because they run too hot for my liking
    and thus I wouldn't use either in SLI.

  • 0 Hide
    EzioAs , June 25, 2013 7:18 AM
    Quote:
    Given the evolutionary nature of GPUs, and the time that has passed since the 600s launched, one might reasonably expect a 760 to beat the 670 too, but it never does. To me, the price drop is the only thing it has going for it.

    Not really. The GTX 550ti came about 1.5 year after the GTX 460 and it's still significantly slower not to mention one of the worst price to performance during it's time.

    Quote:
    The endless meddling with shader numbers, clocks, bus width, etc., creates an utter muddle of performance response depending on the game. One really has to judge based on the individual game rather than any general product description or spec summary.

    That's always been the case. You can speculate but in the end, game benchmarks is much more accurate and representative.

    Quote:
    I just hope Skyrim players with 660s don't upgrade on the assumption newer model names mean better performance, but I expect some will.

    Sadly, there are always buyers like that. And it's not just Skyrim gamers as well.

  • 0 Hide
    pauldh , June 25, 2013 7:24 AM
    Interesting side note - Did anyone notice the HD 7850 gaming bundle is gone on Newegg and 7870 only comes with Crysis 3? Buying up to 7950 still nets you 4 free games.

  • 0 Hide
    rohitbaran , June 25, 2013 7:28 AM
    Hmm. All AMD has to do now is drop prices of 7xxx series to compete with this rebranded series from nVidia. Or maybe they can add few more games to their bundle and not drop price a all.
  • -1 Hide
    Mousemonkey , June 25, 2013 7:30 AM
    Quote:
    tomfreak, two good 460s are somewhat less than a single 670 (VRAM limits not
    withstanding), while two 560s will be similar since they're just oc'd 460s and
    most of them had slower clocks than the best 460s. Two 560Tis can be usefully
    better, matching a 670, or even matching a 680 if oc'd
    , but again VRAM capacity
    may be an issue, though for all these older cards there were 2GB versions
    available (but often with slower clocks; I have two oc'd 2GB 460s @ 800MHz
    which run quite well). My gaming PC still has two 900MHz 1GB 560TIs which are
    quicker than a 670 at stock, quicker than a 680 oc'd, at least when the 1GB limit
    is not an issue. They certainly cope with Crysis2 at high detail well enough.

    However, comparing to these newer 600/700 cards, the only older cards that
    do still perform well by comparison (by that I mean the potential gain from SLI)
    are the 570/580, again assuming VRAM capacity is not a factor, though the
    3GB 580 definitely shines here. Indeed, two 580s SLI are almost identical in
    performance to a single 780 for 3DMark11, eg. see:

    http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5516/nvidia-geforce-gtx-770-2gb-video-card-review/index4.html

    Here are my 3DMark11 results for two 797MHz 1.5GB 580s:

    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/6683648
    http://www.3dmark.com/3dm11/6683683

    If you want lots more 460/560 data, see my site:

    http://www.sgidepot.co.uk/sgi.html#PC

    Ian.

    PS. I don't include the 470/480 because they run too hot for my liking
    and thus I wouldn't use either in SLI.


    Can you post some proof of that please.
  • 1 Hide
    EzioAs , June 25, 2013 7:30 AM
    Quote:
    Interesting side note - Did anyone notice the HD 7850 gaming bundle is gone on Newegg and 7870 only comes with Crysis 3? Buying up to 7950 still nets you 4 free games.



    AMD said to Tech Report that "the promo was always advertised as a ‘while supplies last’ campaign. Sadly, some partners are running out of supply of codes."

    Source: http://techreport.com/news/24998/e-tailers-running-out-of-codes-for-never-settle-reloaded-bundles
  • 0 Hide
    mapesdhs , June 25, 2013 7:34 AM
    Quote:
    Can you post some proof of that please.


    I guess there must be some part of "see my site" that you didn't understand. :D 

    I could post oodles of 3DMark and other results here, but that would just clog up the
    thread. I've posted some example links, go have a look and cross-check on 3dmark.com
    and elsewhere.


    I should add that I own about 14 different GTX 460s, including five V2 models; I
    doubt anyone has tested them as much as I have. :D  In addition I have about 35
    other GPUs, including various AMD cards up to 5850 CF (not been able to obtain
    anything newer yet). Most recently I've obtained five GTX 580s. A lot of people
    post speculation and rumour; I go find the cards and run the tests. Friends I know
    who have some newer cards then help out with data for cards like the 670, etc.
    I buy newer cards when I can, but so far the latest models are still beyond my
    budget via 2nd-hand sources.

    Ian.

  • 0 Hide
    mapesdhs , June 25, 2013 7:39 AM
    EzioAs writes:
    > Not really. The GTX 550ti came about 1.5 year after the GTX 460 and it's still significantly slower
    > not to mention one of the worst price to performance during it's time.

    That merely proves my point, ie. that model names are badly misused.


    > That's always been the case. You can speculate but in the end, game benchmarks is much
    > more accurate and representative.

    Which again affirms what I said; the way model names/numbers are used is daft and misleading.


    > Sadly, there are always buyers like that. And it's not just Skyrim gamers as well.

    Indeed, but the whole business ought to be a lot less messy than it is IMO.

    Ian.

  • 9 Hide
    CaptainTom , June 25, 2013 7:46 AM
    Idk this just doesn't impress me much because:

    1) The 7950 has 50% more RAM (And you can bet your gonna need it this fall)
    2) The 7950 overclocks to give you 20-30% (I have seen 40%) more performance above stock whereas the 760 basically just hits a wall no matter what you do.
    3) The 7950 comes with games that can save $100+ or you can sell for $50.

    Am I the only one who thinks this about the 760 and 770?
  • -4 Hide
    kid-mid , June 25, 2013 7:47 AM
    so basically @ $250 it's either look for HD 7950 w/ Boost or GTX 760...
    +1 to nVidia..
Display more comments
React To This Article