Select any two GPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Radeon R7 265 Sapphire Dual-X 2GB Edition Crossfire Radeon HD 7950 3-way Crossfire
Halo: Reach 58% 71%
Cyberpunk 2077 84% 24%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 18% 45%
Red Dead Redemption 2 34% 10%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 34% 10%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 84% 24%
Doom Eternal 15% 23%
Grand Theft Auto VI 104% 37%
FIFA 20 29% 52%
Need For Speed Heat 34% 10%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon HD 7950 3-way Crossfire are significantly better than the AMD Radeon R7 265 Sapphire Dual-X 2GB Edition Crossfire.

The R7 265 has a 100 MHz higher core clock speed than the HD 7950, but the HD 7950 has 208 more Texture Mapping Units than the R7 265. As a result, the HD 7950 exhibits a 153.6 GTexel/s better Texture Fill Rate than the R7 265. This still holds weight but shader performance is generally more relevant, particularly since both of these GPUs support at least DirectX 10.

The R7 265 has a 100 MHz higher core clock speed than the HD 7950, but the HD 7950 has 32 more Render Output Units than the R7 265. As a result, the HD 7950 exhibits a 19.2 GPixel/s better Pixel Fill Rate than the R7 265. However, both GPUs support DirectX 9 or above, and pixeling performance is only really relevant when comparing older cards.

The R7 265 was released over a year more recently than the HD 7950, and so the R7 265 is likely to have better driver support, meaning it will be more optimized for running the latest games when compared to the HD 7950.

Both GPUs exhibit very powerful performance, so it probably isn't worth upgrading from one to the other, as both are capable of running even the most demanding games at the highest settings.

The HD 7950 has 5120 MB more video memory than the R7 265, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. This is supported by the fact that the HD 7950 also has superior memory performance overall.

The HD 7950 has 361.6 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the R7 265, which means that the memory performance of the HD 7950 is massively better than the R7 265.

The Radeon R7 265 Sapphire Dual-X 2GB Edition Crossfire has 2048 Shader Processing Units and the Radeon HD 7950 3-way Crossfire has 5376. However, the actual shader performance of the R7 265 is 1231 and the actual shader performance of the HD 7950 is 3656. The HD 7950 having 2425 better shader performance and an altogether better performance when taking into account other relevant data means that the HD 7950 delivers a massively smoother and more efficient experience when processing graphical data than the R7 265.

The Radeon R7 265 Sapphire Dual-X 2GB Edition Crossfire requires 300 Watts to run and the Radeon HD 7950 3-way Crossfire requires 540 Watts. We would recommend a PSU with at least 650 Watts for the R7 265. The HD 7950 requires 240 Watts more than the R7 265 to run. The difference is significant enough that the HD 7950 may have an adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the R7 265.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed900 MHzvs800 MHz
Boost Clock925 MHzvs-
ArchitecturePitcairn PROGCN 1.0 Tahiti PRO (x3)
OC Potential Fair vs Fair
Driver Support - vs Good
Release Date13 Feb 2014vs01 Jan 2012
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved
Comparison

Resolution Performance

1366x768 - green tick vs green tick -
1600x900 - green tick vs green tick -
1920x1080
8.9
vs green tick
10
2560x1440 - green tick vs green tick -
3840x2160 - green tick vs green tick -

GPU Memory

Memory4096 MBvs9216 MB
Memory Speed1400 MHzvs1250 MHz
Memory Bus512 Bitvs1152 Bit
Memory TypeGDDR5vsGDDR5
Memory Bandwidth358.4GB/secvs720GB/sec
L2 Cache - vs green tick 2304 KB
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%
Comparison

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units2048vs5376
Actual Shader Performance59%vs100%
Technology28nmvs28nm
Texture Mapping Units128vs336
Texture Rate115.2 GTexel/svs268.8 GTexel/s
Render Output Units64vs96
Pixel Rate57.6 GPixel/svs76.8 GPixel/s
Comparison

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)4096x2160vs4096x2160
VGA Connections0vs0
DVI Connections2vs3
HDMI Connections1vs3
DisplayPort Connections-vs-
Comparison

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power300 Wattsvs540 Watts
Recommended PSU650 Watts & 24 Amps-

GPU Features

DirectX11.2vs12.0
Shader Model5.0vs5.0
Open GL4.3vs4.4
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUnono
SLI/Crossfirenovsno
Dedicatedyesvsyes
Comparison

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended ProcessorIntel Core i5-4670K 3.4GHzvsIntel Core i5-3570K 3.4GHz
Recommended RAM8 GBvs8 GB
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution1920x1080vs1920x1080

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewRadeon R7 265 Sapphire Dual-X 2GB Edition Crossfire is a solution of two Radeon R7 265 Sapphire Dual-X 2GB Edition put together using AMD's Crossfire technology.Radeon HD 7950 3-way Crossfire is a solution of three Radeon HD 7950 put together using AMD'S Crossfire technology.
Check the page of Radeon HD 7950 to know more about its chip.
Crossfire relies a lot on proper driver support and may suffer from micro-stuttering in lower frame rates (below 30). Benchmarks indicate the performance is overall, is somewhat superior to a single Radeon HD 7990 performing by itself it might be worse (depending on whether or not the 3D game supports crossfire or in the graphics driver) than a single Radeon HD 7950. Expect this combination to draw up to 540 Watt though the average power consumption should be slightly lower.
Even the most demanding games will run at the highest settings.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
-
GPU Variants
-
-

Title

Body