G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, raw graphics performance, VRAM, feature set, power efficiency, pricing context, and long-term value so you can see which GPU actually makes more sense.

GeForce GTX 760

2013

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 19.3 vs 0 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs Unknown).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon Pro Vega 16: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon Pro Vega 16 is already obsolete for modern gaming.

Trade-offs

❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌126.7% higher power demand at 170W vs 75W.

Radeon Pro Vega 16

2018

Why buy it

✅Draws 75W instead of 170W, a 95W reduction.
✅More future proof: GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) on 14nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2018-era hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 19.3 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $249 MSRP).

GeForce GTX 760

2013

Radeon Pro Vega 16

2018

Why buy it

✅Delivers 100+% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 19.3 vs 0 G3D/$ ($249 MSRP vs Unknown MSRP).
✅100+% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs Unknown).
✅Less risky long-term buy than Radeon Pro Vega 16: it remains the more sensible modern option while Radeon Pro Vega 16 is already obsolete for modern gaming.

Why buy it

✅Draws 75W instead of 170W, a 95W reduction.
✅More future proof: GCN 5.0 (2017−2020) on 14nm with a newer platform for upcoming games.

Trade-offs

❌Very weak future-proofing: 2013-era hardware with 4 GB of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌126.7% higher power demand at 170W vs 75W.

Trade-offs

❌Less VRAM, with Unknown vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌Very weak future-proofing: 2018-era hardware with Unknown of VRAM is already obsolete for modern gaming and is hard to recommend today.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 0 vs 19.3 G3D/$ (Unknown MSRP vs $249 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is GeForce GTX 760 better than Radeon Pro Vega 16?

Yes, but this is not really about a huge raw performance gap. The broader synthetic picture is also very close at 4,813 vs 4,809 in G3D Mark. The bigger reason to prefer GeForce GTX 760 is the overall package: you are getting no meaningful modern upscaling stack.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 760 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more VRAM at 4 GB instead of Unknown and the stronger feature stack with no meaningful modern upscaling stack instead of FSR upscaling. That extra memory headroom makes it the safer pick for newer games, heavier textures, and higher settings over time.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper card?

GeForce GTX 760 can still make sense if you find it at the right price, especially around $249 MSRP. GeForce GTX 760 is still the smarter buy for most people, though, because the raw performance is close while the overall package is cleaner. GeForce GTX 760 is priced in an unclear MSRP range at $249 MSRP versus an unclear MSRP, and you are getting 0.1% higher G3D Mark. Radeon Pro Vega 16 is the newer 2018 card, so it still has a real case if you care more about newer architecture and lower power draw (75W vs 170W) than about squeezing out the strongest gaming value today.

When does Radeon Pro Vega 16 make more sense than GeForce GTX 760?

Yes. Radeon Pro Vega 16 is still an excellent gaming GPU in 2026: it is still fine for 1080p, but 1440p and especially 4K require more compromise. It makes more sense if your priority is newer architecture, lower power draw (75W vs 170W), and staying closer to an unclear MSRP more than squeezing out the extra headroom of GeForce GTX 760. The trade-off is that GeForce GTX 760 currently gives you 0.1% higher G3D Mark. It also leads G3D-per-dollar by 100+%.

Games Benchmarks

Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 9800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.

Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.

GeForce GTX 760 Benchmark Check

Radeon Pro Vega 16 Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 760	Radeon Pro Vega 16
1080p
low	100 FPS	79 FPS
medium	86 FPS	68 FPS
high	68 FPS	55 FPS
ultra	40 FPS	36 FPS
1440p
low	87 FPS	70 FPS
medium	77 FPS	60 FPS
high	53 FPS	43 FPS
ultra	31 FPS	28 FPS
4K
low	28 FPS	25 FPS
medium	26 FPS	23 FPS
high	17 FPS	15 FPS
ultra	15 FPS	13 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 760 Open Radeon Pro Vega 16

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	GeForce GTX 760	Radeon Pro Vega 16
1080p
low	137 FPS	111 FPS
medium	94 FPS	82 FPS
high	70 FPS	63 FPS
ultra	45 FPS	39 FPS
1440p
low	74 FPS	63 FPS
medium	47 FPS	43 FPS
high	34 FPS	31 FPS
ultra	24 FPS	21 FPS
4K
low	27 FPS	24 FPS
medium	17 FPS	16 FPS
high	13 FPS	13 FPS
ultra	10 FPS	9 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 760 Open Radeon Pro Vega 16

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	GeForce GTX 760	Radeon Pro Vega 16
1080p
low	217 FPS	216 FPS
medium	173 FPS	173 FPS
high	144 FPS	144 FPS
ultra	108 FPS	108 FPS
1440p
low	162 FPS	162 FPS
medium	130 FPS	130 FPS
high	108 FPS	108 FPS
ultra	81 FPS	81 FPS
4K
low	108 FPS	108 FPS
medium	87 FPS	87 FPS
high	72 FPS	72 FPS
ultra	54 FPS	53 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 760 Open Radeon Pro Vega 16

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	GeForce GTX 760	Radeon Pro Vega 16
1080p
low	150 FPS	140 FPS
medium	110 FPS	111 FPS
high	94 FPS	92 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	74 FPS
1440p
low	117 FPS	101 FPS
medium	88 FPS	81 FPS
high	75 FPS	68 FPS
ultra	57 FPS	53 FPS
4K
low	68 FPS	60 FPS
medium	48 FPS	46 FPS
high	38 FPS	36 FPS
ultra	26 FPS	25 FPS

Open GeForce GTX 760 Open Radeon Pro Vega 16

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GTX 760 and Radeon Pro Vega 16

GeForce GTX 760

The GeForce GTX 760 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 25 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock ranges from 980 MHz to 1033 MHz. It has 1152 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 170W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,813 points. Launch price was $249.

Radeon Pro Vega 16

The Radeon Pro Vega 16 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 14 2018. It features the GCN 5.0 architecture. The core clock ranges from 815 MHz to 1190 MHz. It has 1024 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 14 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 4,809 points.

⚡

Graphics Performance

The GeForce GTX 760 scores 4,813 and the Radeon Pro Vega 16 reaches 4,809 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 0.1% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GTX 760 is built on Kepler while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 uses GCN 5.0, both on 28 nm vs 14 nm. Shader units: 1,152 (GeForce GTX 760) vs 1,024 (Radeon Pro Vega 16). Raw compute: 2.378 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 760) vs 2.437 TFLOPS (Radeon Pro Vega 16). Boost clocks: 1033 MHz vs 1190 MHz.

Feature	GeForce GTX 760	Radeon Pro Vega 16
G3D Mark Score	4,813	4,809
Architecture	Kepler	GCN 5.0
Process Node	28 nm	14 nm
Shading Units	1152+13%	1024
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.378 TFLOPS	2.437 TFLOPS+2%
Boost Clock	1033 MHz	1190 MHz+15%
ROPs	32	32
TMUs	96+50%	64
L1 Cache	96 KB	256 KB+167%
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	1 MB+100%

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 760 gives access to NVIDIA DLSS (Deep Learning Super Sampling), widely regarding as the superior upscaling method for image quality. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 relies on FSR (FidelityFX Super Resolution), which is capable but generally slightly noisier than DLSS in motion.

Feature	GeForce GTX 760	Radeon Pro Vega 16
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 760 comes with 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 has 0 MB. The GeForce GTX 760 offers 100+% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 256-bit vs 64-bit. L2 Cache: 0.5 MB (GeForce GTX 760) vs 1 MB (Radeon Pro Vega 16) — the Radeon Pro Vega 16 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.

Feature	GeForce GTX 760	Radeon Pro Vega 16
VRAM Capacity	4 GB	Shared System RAM
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Bus Width	256-bit+300%	64-bit
L2 Cache	0.5 MB	1 MB+100%

🖥️

Display & API Support

DirectX support: 12 (11_0) (GeForce GTX 760) vs 12 (12_1) (Radeon Pro Vega 16). Vulkan: 1.2 vs 1.3. OpenGL: 4.3 vs 4.6. Maximum simultaneous displays: 4 vs 4.

Feature	GeForce GTX 760	Radeon Pro Vega 16
DirectX	12 (11_0)	12 (12_1)
Vulkan	1.2	1.3+8%
OpenGL	4.3	4.6+7%
Max Displays	4	4

🎬

Media & Encoding

Hardware encoder: NVENC 1st gen (GeForce GTX 760) vs VCE 4.0 (Radeon Pro Vega 16). Decoder: NVDEC 1st gen vs UVD 7.0. Supported codecs: H.264 (GeForce GTX 760) vs H.264,H.265 (Radeon Pro Vega 16).

Feature	GeForce GTX 760	Radeon Pro Vega 16
Encoder	NVENC 1st gen	VCE 4.0
Decoder	NVDEC 1st gen	UVD 7.0
Codecs	H.264	H.264,H.265

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 760 draws 170W versus the Radeon Pro Vega 16's 75W — a 77.6% difference. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 500W (GeForce GTX 760) vs 1W (Radeon Pro Vega 16). Power connectors: 2x 6-pin vs Integrated. Card length: 241mm vs 0mm, occupying 2 vs 0 slots. Typical load temperature: 80°C vs 80.

Feature	GeForce GTX 760	Radeon Pro Vega 16
TDP	170W	75W-56%
Recommended PSU	500W	1W-100%
Power Connector	2x 6-pin	Integrated
Length	241mm	0mm
Height	111mm	0mm
Slots	2	0-100%
Temp (Load)	80°C	80
Perf/Watt	28.3	64.1+127%

💰

Value Analysis

The GeForce GTX 760 launched at $249 MSRP, while the Radeon Pro Vega 16 launched at $0. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 costs 100+% less ($249 savings) on MSRP. Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 19.3 (GeForce GTX 760) vs Infinity (Radeon Pro Vega 16) — the Radeon Pro Vega 16 offers Infinity% better value. The Radeon Pro Vega 16 is the newer GPU (2018 vs 2013).