Bang, Watt and Efficiency Per Buck - 2,560x1,440

Value analysis at 2,560x1,440 - QHD Graphics card Aggregate FPS Normalised FPS1 Approx. price Bang4buck Power consumption Bang4watt2 HEXUS Efficiency Score3 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080 357.30 298.65 699 0.43 229 1.30 1.73 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1070 289.10 256.85 449 0.57 197 1.30 1.87 NVIDIA GeForce GTX Titan X 296.70 261.05 999 0.26 302 0.86 1.12 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti 285.60 253.30 649 0.39 296 0.86 1.25 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 225.40 213.80 430 0.50 225 0.95 1.45 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 970 178.76 148.14 329 0.45 195 0.76 1.21 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780 Ti 185.90 158.85 699 0.23 299 0.53 0.76 NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680 116.80 55.20 499 0.11 202 0.27 0.38 AMD Radeon Fury X 232.90 216.15 649 0.33 344 0.63 0.96 AMD Radeon R9 390X 212.10 191.85 380 0.50 349 0.55 1.05 AMD Radeon R9 390 198.40 175.50 330 0.53 333 0.53 1.06

The same process is repeated at the 2,560x1,440 resolution. The majority of cards are able to hit close to 60fps with image quality settings to very high or ultra, and it's only the true champion GPUs that run much higher. The usual combination of normalised performance and price puts the GTX 1070 on top, though it's worth noting that the AMD R9 390 and 390X offer solid frame rates at decent prices.

These resolution and image settings are a step too far for the older GTX 680.

Here's where Pascal really shines. Excellent performance is accompanied by best-in-class energy efficiency. We'll only know how this metric truly plays out when AMD's next-gen GPU hardware arrives.

The combined score gives the GTX 1070 an impressive lead over any other GPU than its bigger brother.