Real World Speed
Performance profile from 206,691 user samples
66,635 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 113% AMD(1002 0B36)
Worst Bench: 99% AMD(1002 0B36)
Poor: 99% Great: 113%
SPEED RANK: 16th / 635
140,056 User Benchmarks
Best Bench: 87% Nvidia(10DE 17C8) ≥ 4GB
Worst Bench: 68% Asus(1043 855B) ≥ 4GB
Poor: 68% Great: 87%
SPEED RANK: 35th / 635
Effective 3D Speed
Effective 3D Gaming GPU Speed
106 % Much faster effective speed.
+36%
78.3 %
Lighting
Avg. Locally-deformable PRT (Bat)
394 fps Better lighting effects.
+25%
314 fps
MRender
Avg. Render target array GShader (Sphere)
239 fps Faster multi rendering.
+24%
193 fps
Gravity
Avg. NBody particle system (Galaxy)
400 fps Much faster NBody calculation.
+38%
289 fps
Lighting
Locally-deformable PRT (Bat)
444 fps Better peak lighting effects.
+23%
360 fps
MRender
Render target array GShader (Sphere)
246 fps Faster peak multi rendering.
+17%
211 fps
Gravity
NBody particle system (Galaxy)
428 fps Much faster peak NBody calculation.
+33%
322 fps
CSGO
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
242 Fps Better CSGO Fps.
+23%
196 Fps
Fortnite
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
167 Fps Much Better Fortnite Fps.
+38%
121 Fps
PUBG
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
94 Fps Better PUBG Fps.
+15%
81 Fps
GTAV
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
117 Fps Much Better GTAV Fps.
+48%
80 Fps
LoL
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
225 Fps +5% 215 Fps
Overwatch
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
135 Fps Better Overwatch Fps.
+18%
115 Fps
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
115 Fps Much Better The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt Fps.
+40%
82 Fps
Minecraft
Avg. Fps @ 1080p on Max
215 Fps 244 Fps Slightly Better Minecraft Fps.
+13%
Market Share
Based on 23,913,598 GPUs tested.
Market Share
Market Share (trailing 30 days)
2.09 % Hugely higher market share.
+287%
0.54 %
Value
Value For Money
61.8 % Much better value.
+60%
38.6 %
User Rating
UBM User Rating
123 % More popular.
+16%
106 %
Price
Price (score)
$407 Cheaper.
+15%
$480
Age
Newest
6 Months Hugely more recent.
+89%
56 Months
Reflection
High dynamic range lighting (Teapot)
309 fps 318 fps +3%
Parallax
Parallax occlusion mapping (Stones)
873 fps Hugely better peak texture detail.
+136%
370 fps
Splatting
Force Splatted Flocking (Swarm)
378 fps Much faster peak complex splatting.
+68%
225 fps
Reflection
Avg. High dynamic range lighting (Teapot)
294 fps +4% 284 fps
Parallax
Avg. Parallax occlusion mapping (Stones)
785 fps Hugely better texture detail.
+142%
324 fps
Splatting
Avg. Force Splatted Flocking (Swarm)
363 fps Hugely faster complex splatting.
+83%
198 fps
ADVERTISEMENT

Out of the box the reference 5700 XT has high burst speeds but under load it overheats and therefore drops frames to the extent that it is more or less unusable for demanding games like PUBG. In order to settle the card it was under volted by 120 mV and the maximum clock was lowered to 1,980 MHz (the stock BIOS and 19.9.1 driver defaulted the card to 2,030 MHz). The fan curve also had to be turned up to around 50% power at 75 degrees (which is a lot noisier than stock). After making these changes the card delivered far more consistent performance albeit with a reduced top speed and unacceptable (hair dryer) levels of noise. There were also incompatibilities with GTAV: enabling reflection MSAA resulted in very poor, almost matt, reflection fidelity (the same bug appeared on several Navi and Vega cards). The reference 5700 XT is great for beating benchmarks, but it is not so great for playing games. Thousands of people purchased the reference card expecting flagship performance, instead they got a shopping trolley with a V6 engine. It appears that the same marketing tactics were employed for the reference Vega 56 and 64 series of graphics cards which we will purchase for our gaming lab and generate effective Fps gaming metrics as soon as possible (results here). AMD appear to have very short term marketing strategists at the helm, they seem more concerned with this years bonuses than the longevity of the brand. [Jul '19 GPUPro]

MORE DETAILS

The new GTX 980 Ti shares the same board as the more expensive Titan-X but with various restrictions including a reduced number of CUDA cores (3072 to 2816, -8.3%). Although the 980 Ti has the same 384-bit memory bandwidth as the Titan-X it only has 6GB of GDDR5 vs. 12GB in the Titan-X. So far we only have one user benchmark from a pre-release unit of the GTX 980 Ti so the following benchmarks are provisional. Comparing the Titan-X and 980 Ti shows that the Ti only lags by around 8%, which is in line with the CUDA core counts on the two cards. On the other hand comparing the GTX 980 and GTX 980 Ti shows that the Ti is around 16% faster. We don't have reliable prices for the GTX 980 Ti yet so a precise value rating isn't possible but as a card aimed at resolutions greater than 1080p it will struggle to match the GTX 970 for the vast majority of users. [May '15 GPUPro]

MORE DETAILS

Graphics Card Rankings (Price vs Performance) January 2020 GPU Rankings.

We calculate effective 3D speed which estimates gaming performance for the top 12 games. Effective speed is adjusted by current prices to yield value for money. Our figures are checked against thousands of individual user ratings. The customizable table below combines these factors to bring you the definitive list of top GPUs. [GPUPro]

ADVERTISEMENT

Group Test Results

  • Best user rated - User sentiment trumps benchmarks for this comparison.
  • Best value for money - Value for money is based on real world performance.
  • Fastest real world speed - Real World Speed measures performance for typical consumers.
How Fast Is Your GPU? (Bench your build) Size up your PC in less than a minute.

Welcome to our freeware PC speed test tool. UserBenchmark will test your PC and compare the results to other users with the same components. You can quickly size up your PC, identify hardware problems and explore the best upgrades.

UserBenchmark of the month

How it works

  • - Download and run UserBenchMark.
  • - CPU tests include: integer, floating and string.
  • - GPU tests include: six 3D game simulations.
  • - Drive tests include: read, write, sustained write and mixed IO.
  • - RAM tests include: single/multi core bandwidth and latency.
  • - Reports are generated and presented on userbenchmark.com.
  • - Identify the strongest components in your PC.
  • - See speed test results from other users.
  • - Compare your components to the current market leaders.
  • - Explore your best upgrade options with a virtual PC build.
  • - Compare your in-game FPS to other users with your hardware.
  • - Share your opinion by voting.

 Frequently Asked Questions

 Best User Rated

The Best.
CPUGPUSSD
Intel Core i5-9600K $218Nvidia GTX 1660S (Super) $240Crucial MX500 250GB $46
Intel Core i5-9400F $155Nvidia GTX 1650S (Super) $170Samsung 850 Evo 120GB $78
Intel Core i7-9700K $370Nvidia RTX 2060 $340Samsung 850 Pro 512GB $204
HDDRAMUSB
Seagate Barracuda 1TB (2016) $37Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 C16 2x8GB $73SanDisk Extreme 64GB $72
WD Blue 1TB (2012) $40Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 3000 C15 2x8GB $63SanDisk Extreme 32GB $46
Seagate Barracuda 3TB (2016) $85G.SKILL Trident Z DDR4 3200 C14 4x16GB $643SanDisk Ultra Fit 32GB $16
Today's hottest deals
About  •  User Guide  •  FAQs  •  Email  •  Privacy  •  Developer Feedback