NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030
vs
AMD Radeon R7 265

NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030
AMD Radeon R7 265
GT 1030 R7 265 Difference
NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 AMD Radeon R7 265
Price $ 79.0 $ 149.0 70 (89%)
Year 2017 2014 3 (0%)
Maximum Recorded Temperature C 61C
Max Fan Noise dB 43.6dB
Recommended Power Supply 380W 500W 120 (32%)
Benchmark CPU Intel Core i7-7700K @ 4.20GHz ($354.99) Intel Core i7-4770K @ 3.50GHz ($284.99)
CPU Impact on FPS +0.0 FPS +0.0 FPS 0 (0%)
CPU Impact on FPS % 0.0% 0.0% 0 (0%)
Benchmark Quality Settings Ultra Quality Settings Ultra Quality Settings
Average 1080p Performance 22.4 FPS 32.6 FPS 10.2 (46%)
Average 1440p Performance 15.9 FPS 21.4 FPS 5.5 (35%)
Average 4K Performance 8.9 FPS 13.2 FPS 4.3 (48%)
Memory 2 GB 2 GB 0 (0%)
1080p Cost Per Frame $ 3.5 $ 4.6 1.1 (31%)
1440p Cost Per Frame $ 5.0 $ 7.0 2 (40%)
4K Cost Per Frame $ 8.9 $ 11.3 2.4 (27%)
Overall Combination Score 66/100 60/100 6 (9%)
Our Verdict: The R7 265 is faster by 35% for 1440p gaming. The price/performance ratio is much better for GT 1030 .

Game Performance at selected quality settings

Change Quality Settings

1920x1080

NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030
AMD Radeon R7 265
Year Game Frames Per Second
2019 Apex Legends
8
9.0
24
27.0
2019 Anthem
5
5.8
15
17.4
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
7
8.5
22
25.5
2019 Resident Evil 2
17
19.9
30
33.6
2019 Metro Exodus
8
8.9
13
15.0
2019 World War Z
14
16.4
27
31.0
2018 Just Cause 4
11
12.8
19
21.6
2018 Monster Hunter: World
12
13.8
20
23.3
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
15
17.7
27
30.0
2017 For Honor
21
23.6
36
40.0
2017 Project CARS 2
15
16.7
25
28.3
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
18
20.3
30
34.3
2016 Dishonored 2
10
12.2
18
20.6
2015 Rocket League
62
69.0
104
116.5
2015 Need For Speed
17
19.1
29
32.3
2015 Project CARS
16
18.3
27
31.0
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
30
33.5
50
56.6
2013 Crysis 3
21
24.1
36
40.7
2013 Battlefield 4
25
28.4
31
35.3
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
42
47.3
71
79.9
2009 League of Legends
79
88.7
134
149.9

2560x1440

NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030
AMD Radeon R7 265
Year Game Frames Per Second
2019 Apex Legends
5
6.7
16
20.1
2019 Anthem
3
4.6
11
13.8
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
5
6.6
15
19.8
2019 Resident Evil 2
10
13.4
18
22.6
2019 Metro Exodus
5
6.9
9
11.7
2019 World War Z
9
12.0
18
22.6
2018 Just Cause 4
7
9.5
12
16.0
2018 Monster Hunter: World
7
9.7
13
16.3
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
10
12.8
17
21.6
2017 For Honor
11
13.8
18
23.3
2017 Project CARS 2
9
11.8
16
20.0
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
14
18.3
24
31.0
2016 Dishonored 2
8
10.4
14
17.6
2015 Rocket League
23
29.5
40
50.0
2015 Need For Speed
11
14.8
20
25.0
2015 Project CARS
11
14.0
18
23.6
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
17
21.7
29
36.6
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
31
39.4
53
66.6
2009 League of Legends
39
49.2
66
83.3

3840x2160

NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030
AMD Radeon R7 265
Year Game Frames Per Second
2019 Apex Legends
2
4.0
8
12.0
2019 Anthem
1
2.5
5
7.5
2019 Far Cry New Dawn
2
3.5
7
10.5
2019 Resident Evil 2
4
6.6
7
11.2
2019 Metro Exodus
3
4.3
5
7.3
2019 World War Z
4
6.9
9
13.0
2018 Just Cause 4
3
4.9
5
8.3
2018 Monster Hunter: World
3
4.6
5
7.8
2017 Need For Speed: Payback
6
8.9
10
15.0
2017 For Honor
4
6.9
8
11.7
2017 Project CARS 2
6
9.9
11
16.6
2017 Forza Motorsport 7
10
15.4
18
26.0
2016 Dishonored 2
5
8.3
9
14.0
2015 Rocket League
9
13.8
16
23.3
2015 Need For Speed
6
9.9
11
16.6
2015 Project CARS
6
9.9
11
16.6
2015 Rainbow Six Siege
7
10.0
11
17.0
2012 Counter-Strike: Global Offensive
24
35.5
41
59.9
2009 League of Legends
13
19.7
23
33.3
GT 1030 vs R7 265 with i7-7700K vs i7-4770K at 1080p and ultra vs ultra settings
GT 1030 vs R7 265 with i7-7700K vs i7-4770K at 1440p and ultra vs ultra settings
GT 1030 vs R7 265 with i7-7700K vs i7-4770K at 4K and ultra vs ultra settings

NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 / i7-7700K

The GT 1030 is more suitable for budget PC builds and less demanding games. With current 2048 MB RAM, the GT 1030 can have serious memory-related bottlenecks in more modern games. The GT 1030 's power requirements are reasonable and it is very efficient compared to the competition. With current 2048 MB RAM, the GT 1030 can have very few memory-related bottlenecks in more modern games.

AMD Radeon R7 265 / i7-4770K

The R7 265 is more suitable for budget PC builds and less demanding games. The price/performance ratio is excellent for R7 265 against the competition in budget graphics cards. With current 2048 MB RAM, the R7 265 can have serious memory-related bottlenecks in more modern games. With regards to max load temperature, the R7 265 's cooling is excellent at keeping it cool and under control. This combination between R7 265 and Intel Core i7-4770K @ 3.50GHz has less than 8% bottleneck in many games and is perfect match to avoid FPS loss. This combination between R7 265 and Intel Core i7-4770K @ 3.50GHz is a perfect match to avoid FPS loss. With current 2048 MB RAM, the R7 265 can have very few memory-related bottlenecks in more modern games.

GT 1030 vs R7 265 Specifications Comparison

Board Design

GT 1030 R7 265
Board NumberPG110C630
Length5.7 inches 145 mm8.28 inches 210 mm
Outputs1x DVI1x HDMI2x DVI1x HDMI1x DisplayPort
Power ConnectorsNone1x 6-pin
Slot WidthSingle-slotDual-slot
TDP30 W150 W

Clock Speeds

GT 1030 R7 265
Boost Clock1468 MHz925 MHz
GPU Clock1228 MHz900 MHz
Memory Clock1502 MHz 6008 MHz effective1400 MHz 5600 MHz effective

Graphics Card

GT 1030 R7 265
Bus InterfacePCIe 3.0 x4PCIe 3.0 x16
GenerationGeForce 1000Volcanic Islands (R7 200)
Launch Price79 USD149 USD
ProductionActiveEnd-of-life
Release DateMay 17th, 2017Feb 13th, 2014

Graphics Features

GT 1030 R7 265
DirectX12.0 (12_1)12.0 (11_1)
OpenCL1.21.2
OpenGL4.64.5
Shader Model6.15.1
Vulkan1.1.821.1.77

Graphics Processor

GT 1030 R7 265
ArchitecturePascalGCN 1.0
Die Size74 mm²212 mm²
GPU NameGP108Pitcairn
GPU VariantGP108-300-A1Pitcairn PRO (215-0828062)
Process Size14 nm28 nm
Transistors1,800 million2,800 million

Memory

GT 1030 R7 265
Bandwidth48.06 GB/s179.2 GB/s
Memory Bus64 bit256 bit
Memory Size2048 MB2048 MB
Memory TypeGDDR5GDDR5

Render Config

GT 1030 R7 265
ROPs1632
Shading Units3841024
TMUs2464

Theoretical Performance

GT 1030 R7 265
FP32 (float) performance1,127 GFLOPS1,894 GFLOPS
FP64 (double) performance35.23 GFLOPS (1:32)118.4 GFLOPS (1:16)
Pixel Rate23.49 GPixel/s29.60 GPixel/s
Texture Rate35.23 GTexel/s59.20 GTexel/s

Discussion and Comments

Share Your Comments