AMD
Radeon R9 270 vs GeForce GTS 150
Full comparison of specs, performance and benchmarks
NVIDIA
GTS 150
Aggregate performance score
We've compared R9 270 and GTS 150 across specs and all relevant benchmarks.
↗R9 270 outperforms GTS 150 by ~10% on the catalog index; this is not a measured FPS gain.+10%
Scores are normalized on the Head to Head scale. Higher is better. How is this calculated?H2HBench Data Quality
Low confidenceSpecifications: Field verification not recordedVerified gaming results: 0Estimated / unverified results: 32Price record updated: Sep 6, 2026
Limited verified data
H2HBench Verdict
Higher catalog score: Radeon R9 270 (~7%)
The score difference is not a measured FPS improvement.
Reasons to consider R9 270
- Higher catalog performance index
- More graphics memory
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 2.1 · Not supported
Reasons to consider GTS 150
- Lower stated power consumption
- Lower recorded market price
- Recorded feature support: OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1 · Not supported
Catalog metrics radar
Axes with missing data are hidden; every value uses a fixed scale.
AMD
NVIDIAPerformance
Efficiency
Price / performance
Memory capacity
3431
7673
100100
5643
Graphics card ranking
Positions 196–201of 321
Which should you choose?
Two practical conclusions based on community votes and gaming value.
GeForce GTS 150
114 likesHead to Head visitors currently choose this model more often.
Overview
Scores are calculated from specifications, performance, and efficiency.
GamesDirectX, OpenCL, and Vulkan performance
34Better
31
Professional applications3D modeling, video editing, and rendering
31Better
29
AI and machine learningMachine-learning and AI capabilities
28Better
26
Power efficiencyPower consumption across workloads
76Better
73
Head to Head scoreOverall catalog score
49Better
46
Specifications
The better numeric value is highlighted in green, taking the metric direction into account.
Device class
Max monitors
Max resolution
USB Type-C
Recommended PSU
Length
Thickness
DirectX
Vulkan
OpenGL
TFLOPSBetter
Power consumptionBetter
Memory type
Power connector
Release date
Architecture
Compute API
Launch priceBetter
Shader units / coresBetter
Clock speedBetter
Base clockBetter
Boost clockBetter
VRAMBetter
Memory frequencyBetter
Memory bus
Memory bandwidthBetter
Interface
Power consumptionBetter
Process nodeBetter
Die sizeBetter
Memory cacheBetter
Transistor countBetter
DisplayPort
HDMI
Upscaling
Gaming FPS
Available results are shown separately; missing data is not treated as zero.
The Gaming FPS section compares R9 270 and GTS 150 across curated H2H Lab game presets. The useful signal is not only average FPS, but also how each device behaves at 1440p and 4K, how memory capacity and bus width affect heavy textures, and whether the game engine favors raster performance, ray tracing, or driver maturity.
R9 270GTS 150
Verified externalEstimatedSources ↗
Counter-Strike 2
1080p High
172 FPS
152 FPS
1080p Ultra
118 FPS
107 FPS
1440p Ultra
64 FPS
60 FPS
4K Ultra
23 FPS
23 FPS
Counter-Strike 2R9 270172 FPSGTS 150152 FPSR9 270118 FPSGTS 150107 FPSR9 27064 FPSGTS 15060 FPSR9 27023 FPSGTS 15023 FPS
Cyberpunk 2077R9 270111 FPSGTS 15098 FPSR9 27093 FPSGTS 15085 FPSR9 27046 FPSGTS 15043 FPSR9 27016 FPSGTS 15015 FPS
Forza Horizon 5R9 270140 FPSGTS 150124 FPSR9 27088 FPSGTS 15080 FPSR9 27058 FPSGTS 15054 FPSR9 27034 FPSGTS 15033 FPS
Hogwarts LegacyR9 27091 FPSGTS 15080 FPSR9 27074 FPSGTS 15067 FPSR9 27041 FPSGTS 15039 FPSR9 27016 FPSGTS 15015 FPS
H2H workload indices
Comparable internal indices on a fixed 0–100 scale.
H2H Raster IndexH2H Index / 10034319%
H2H Compute IndexH2H Index / 100373214%
H2H Rendering IndexH2H Index / 100403416%
H2H Memory Workload IndexH2H Index / 100564326%
H2H Efficiency IndexH2H Index / 10076734%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
H2H AI workload indices
Estimated workload profiles based on available performance and memory data.
H2H Image Generation IndexH2H Index / 100443620%
H2H ML Training IndexH2H Index / 100433618%
H2H Inference IndexH2H Index / 100403416%
H2H Local LLM IndexH2H Index / 100463819%
H2H Computer Vision IndexH2H Index / 100403513%
These are versioned H2H calculated indices derived from normalized catalog data. They are not results from a third-party benchmark.
Graphics APIs, SDKs and upscaling
DirectX12.010.0
Vulkan1.2Not supported
OpenGL4.63.3
UpscalingNot supportedNot supported
Compute APIOpenCL 2.1OpenCL 1.1, CUDA 1.1
Architecture and release
ArchitectureGCN 2.0Tesla
Process node28 nmBetter65 nm
Release date20132009
Device classDesktopDesktop
GPU cores, die and clocks
Transistor count2080 millionBetter505 million
Die size160 mm²Better240 mm²
Shader units / cores768Better64
Base clock925 MHzBetter738 MHz
Boost clock975 MHzBetter738 MHz
Board size, power and compatibility
InterfacePCIe 3x16PCIe 2x16
LengthVaries by boardVaries by board
ThicknessVaries by boardIGP
Recommended PSUVaries by boardVaries by board
Power connector6 pin6+6 pin
Display outputs and limits
HDMIBoard dependentBoard dependent
DisplayPortBoard dependentBoard dependent
USB Type-CNoNo
Max monitorsVaries by boardVaries by board
Max resolutionVaries by boardVaries by board
Memory and compute throughput
VRAM2 GB GDDR5Better1 GB GDDR3
Memory typeGDDR5GDDR3
Memory bus256 bit256 bit
TFLOPS1.536Better0.128
Other comparisons
Reviews and questions
Explain this comparison
Beyond percentages: causes, relevant specifications, and practical impact behind every chart.
What AI will explain
Overall score, radar, FPS, synthetic tests, specifications, efficiency, and value.
Evidence details
Data coverage
- Verified gaming results
- 0
- Verified synthetic results
- 0
- Games with verified results
- 0
- Verified community results
- 0
- Estimated / unverified results
- 32
- Specifications
- 0 / 70
Calculated scores · How is this calculated?
Scores use the catalog model and may include estimated inputs. Open each score to see its origin and the methodology.
clamp(round(performance × 0.7 + (efficiency ?? 50) × 0.2 + (value is missing ? 0 : (value − 50) × 0.2)), 0, 100)Price evidence · View sources (5)
Verified community results
No verified community benchmarks yet.
Reviewed by
No individual editorial review is recorded for this comparison.
Comparison history
Show recorded changes (4)
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
- · Record updated: products
Why you can trust this comparison
Origin and confidence are evaluated from the evidence attached to each value. Unverified results are identified, and specification, benchmark and price dates remain separate.
Owner experiences
Real builds, results, and community feedback.
Moderator reviewedHelpful to the communityExpert badges
Frequently asked comparison questions
Short recommendations based on performance, memory, power consumption, and intended use.
01Which is better for gaming: R9 270 or GTS 150?+
R9 270 has the higher overall gaming score, while R9 270 offers the better price-to-performance ratio. The final choice depends on resolution and settings.
02Which is better for streaming?+
GTS 150 is the stronger streaming choice thanks to performance, hardware encoding, and application support. Check AV1, H.264, and HEVC support before buying.
03Which is better for Blender?+
GTS 150 is generally the better option for Blender and GPU rendering. Rendering-engine support and available VRAM also matter.
04Which is better for video editing?+
R9 270 offers more overall performance, while R9 270 offers more memory headroom. Codecs, hardware encoders, and editor optimization can change the result.
05Which is better for neural networks and AI?+
GTS 150 is the more practical option for local AI workloads. VRAM capacity, compute libraries, and framework compatibility are especially important.
06Which is better for 1080p?+
R9 270 is the most rational 1080p choice, where high frame rates and cost per frame matter most.
07Which is better for 1440p?+
R9 270 leads in combined 1440p performance. R9 270 can be preferable for heavy textures and games with high VRAM usage.
08Which is better for 4K?+
R9 270 is preferable for 4K, where total performance, memory bandwidth, and VRAM capacity have the greatest impact.
09Which is better for a quiet PC?+
GTS 150 is easier to use in a quiet build because of its lower estimated power and thermal load. Actual noise depends on the specific cooler.
10Which is better without replacing the power supply?+
GTS 150 is the safer candidate because its stated power consumption is lower. Verify PSU wattage, age, and power connectors.
11Is it worth upgrading from the previous generation?+
Consider upgrading to R9 270 if your current device no longer delivers the required FPS, memory capacity, or feature support. A gain below 15–20% is usually worth waiting for a price cut.