OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Graphics cards Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Graphics cards Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Graphics cards Methodology v3.0

ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£110VRAM:1 GBMemory bus width:128 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):80 W

ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 9 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU
5.5/10

Overall score

Score
5.5/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 94% of models
Score components

40%

3.1

Technical score

25%

8.1

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

3.1

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 94% of graphics cards
6.8

Value for money

Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components

70%

5.5

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

â–¼Worse than 82%
3.1

Technical score

Technical score
3.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

44%

1.4

Performance

24%

1.2

Memory

12%

7.5

Power

11%

6.3

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

5.5

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 99%
8.1

Reviews score

Reviews score
8.1/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 60% of models

80%

8.0

Average grade

20%

8.5

Popularity

Grades by review (9)
3 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 6 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–²Better than 60%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • asus-hd-7770-directcu
  • asus-hd-7770-directcu
  • asus-hd-7770-directcu
  • asus-hd-7770-directcu
asus-hd-7770-directcu
asus-hd-7770-directcu
asus-hd-7770-directcu
asus-hd-7770-directcu
Where to buy
*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What reviewers say about the ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU

Based on 3 · 6

Reviewers praise the display outputs, cool quiet running and value, but find the box contents sparse; performance divides opinion.
Praised
Mixed views
Criticised
Pick a topic to see who said what

What owners say about the ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU

Based on 206 owners sharing their experience in online comments

66%positive15%mixed19%negative

Owners praise strong gaming performance, while limited VRAM, weak frame rates, and driver or CrossFire quirks show the card's age.

What owners dislike

  • Frame rates can drop or be uneven in demanding multiplayer games like Battlefield 4 and in heavy scenes, even at low settings.29
  • Drivers can be troublesome: some owners see the card listed as the wrong model, or find old drivers keep installing instead of new ones.7
  • The 1 GB version runs out of video memory in newer games, which causes heavy stuttering, so owners wish for a 2 GB model.6
  • CrossFire can cause glitches like texture pop-in, freezes, or no CrossFire option, and on some boards the second card runs at x4 speed.6
  • Some owners report games closing or crashing, and drivers crashing under long heavy load.6
  • Pushing the overclock too high makes the card unstable, with crashes and screen artifacts above roughly 900 to 1150 MHz.3

Points mentioned by at least 3 owners, most mentioned first.

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU

Technical score
Technical score
3.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components:

44%

1.4

Performance

24%

1.2

Memory

12%

7.5

Power

11%

6.3

Features

5%

7.6

Design

4%

5.5

Connectivity

3.1
Reviews score
8.1
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the graphics card's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a graphics card that offers a strong balance of performance, features, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 82% of models
Score components:

70%

5.5

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

6.8
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
662 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 662 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 99.1% of graphics cards.
3DMark Port Royal score
0 points
Market range: <0 points – >22.4k points
This graphics card scores 0 points in 3DMark Port Royal, which is lower than 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to 16.9% of graphics cards.
PassMark (G3D) result
1991 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 1991 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 97.7% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
2042 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 2042 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 94.8% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
1.31 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 1.31 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 95.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
VRAM
1 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 1 GB of VRAM, which is less than 98.2% of graphics cards and equal to 1.8% of graphics cards.
Memory type
GDDR5
This graphics card uses GDDR5 memory, which is older than on 85.4% of graphics cards and equal to 13.2% of graphics cards.
Memory bus width
128 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 128 bit memory bus, which is narrower than that of 68.6% of graphics cards and equal to that of 26.7% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
73.6 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 73.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 97.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
4,600 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 4,600 MHz, which is slower than that of 96.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
PCI Express (PCIe) version
3
This graphics card supports PCIe 3, which is older than on 77.6% of graphics cards and equal to 20.1% of graphics cards.
PCIe lanes
x16
This graphics card uses x16 PCIe lanes, which is more than 24.1% of graphics cards and equal to 75.9% of graphics cards.
DirectX version
12
This graphics card supports DirectX 12, which is older than on 81.8% of graphics cards and equal to 17% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.2
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.2, which is older than on 94.9% of graphics cards and equal to 3.9% of graphics cards.
OpenGL version
4.6
This graphics card supports OpenGL 4.6, which is more advanced than on 2% of graphics cards and equal to 98% of graphics cards.
Show more
Max displays supported
3
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 3 displays, which is fewer than 91% of graphics cards and equal to 6.6% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
2560x1600
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 2560x1600, which is lower than that of 97.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
2
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 2 DisplayPort outputs, which is fewer than 78.3% of graphics cards and equal to 9.8% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort version
1.2
This graphics card supports DisplayPort 1.2, which is older than on 93.9% of graphics cards and equal to 5.1% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort link rates
5.4 Gbps
Market range: <5.4 Gbps – >80 Gbps
This graphics card supports DisplayPort link rates up to 5.4 Gbps, which is slower than on 87.9% of graphics cards and equal to 6% of graphics cards.
Show more
What reviewers say
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
80 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 80 W, which is lower than that of 90% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
80 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 80 W under peak load, which is lower than 91.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
500 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 500 W PSU, which is lower than that of 75.2% of graphics cards and equal to that of 8.8% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
80 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 80 W, which is lower than that of 91.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
80 W
Show more
What reviewers say
Size
226x 137x 41 mm
Length
226 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 226 mm long, which is shorter than 83.2% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.2% of graphics cards.
Height
140 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 140 mm tall, which is taller than 79.5% of graphics cards and equal in height to 5.4% of graphics cards.
Slot width
2 slot/s
Market range: <2 slot/s – >3.25 slot/s
This graphics card occupies 2 slot/s, which is slimmer than 52.4% of graphics cards and equal in width to 43.4% of graphics cards.
Weight
2000 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 2000 g, which is heavier than 89.1% of Graphics cards and equal to 2.2% of Graphics cards.
Show more

ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 62.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (80 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    80 W vs 215 W
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 56.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (226 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    226 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 63.6% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (80 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    80 W vs 220 W
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 60% of models

    80%

    8.0

    Average grade

    20%

    8.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (9)
    3 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 6 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • 12.5% higher review score
    Reviews score
    8.1/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
    Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
    Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.6 for now.
    Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 60% of models

    80%

    8.0

    Average grade

    20%

    8.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (9)
    3 reviews: 2 with a printed score, 1 estimated from the review. 6 video reviews, each counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
    User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
    8.1 vs 7.2
  • 4.73x cheaper
    ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU is cheaper than the average graphics card (£110 vs £520).
    £110 vs £520
  • More FP64 throughput
    This graphics card has a better FP64 ratio than the average graphics card (1:16 vs 1:64).
    1:16 vs 1:64
  • 2 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    2 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • 58.2% smaller GPU die
    This graphics card has a lower GPU die size than the average graphics card (123 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    123 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • 2 more DVI outputs
    This graphics card has more DVI outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 0). The average graphics card has 0 DVI outputs.
    2 vs 0
  • 62.8% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (80 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    80 W vs 215 W
  • 23.1% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (500 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    500 W vs 650 W
  • 63.6% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (80 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    80 W vs 220 W
  • 11.4 dB quieter under load
    This graphics card has a lower load noise level than the average graphics card (24 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    24 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 63.6% lower peak power draw
    This graphics card has a lower peak power draw than the average graphics card (80 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a peak power draw of 220 W.
    80 W vs 220 W
  • 56.2 mm shorter card length
    This graphics card is shorter than the average graphics card (226 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    226 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 0.5 slot/s slimmer design
    This graphics card occupies fewer slots than the average graphics card (2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s). The average graphics card occupies 2.5 slot/s.
    2 slot/s vs 2.5 slot/s
  • 59.3% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,020 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,020 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 11 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (1 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    1 GB vs 12 GB
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 30 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (10 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    10 vs 40
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • 46.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,020 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,020 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 60.3% lower sentiment score
    3.1 vs 7.8
  • 8.8% worse value for money
    ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.81 vs 7.4).
    6.81 vs 7.41
  • 59.3% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,020 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,020 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 40 fewer ray tracing cores
    This graphics card has fewer ray tracing cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 ray tracing cores.
    0 vs 40
  • 30 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (10 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    10 vs 40
  • 46.9% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,020 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,020 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • No CUDA support
    This graphics card does not support CUDA, the average graphics card does.
  • 144 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (40 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    40 vs 184
  • 89.2% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (40.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    40.8 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 89.9% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (16.3 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    16.3 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 48 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (16 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    16 vs 64
  • 144 fewer AI cores
    This graphics card has fewer AI cores than the average graphics card (0 vs 144). The average graphics card has 144 AI cores.
    0 vs 144
  • 94.2% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (1.3 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    1.31 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 11 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2012 vs 2023).
    February 2012
    2012 vs 2023
  • 91.2% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (1991 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    1,991 points vs 22,638 points
  • 95.5% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (662 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    662 points vs 14,779 points
  • 83.1% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (2042 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    2,042 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 95.7% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (1.3 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    1.28 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 83.3% lower FP64 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP64 performance than the average graphics card (0.1 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP64 performance of 0.48 TFLOPS.
    0.08 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 3,712 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (640 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    640 vs 4,352
  • 11 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (1 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    1 GB vs 12 GB
  • 83.6% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (73.6 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    73.6 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 75.8% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (4,600 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    4,600 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 64 bit narrower memory bus
    This graphics card has a narrower memory bus than the average graphics card (128 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    128 bit vs 192 bit
  • 34.3% slower VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a lower VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,150 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,150 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 87.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (16 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    16 KB vs 128 KB
  • 5.6x larger process node
    This graphics card uses a larger manufacturing process than the average graphics card (28 nm vs 5 nm). The average graphics card uses a manufacturing process of 5 nm.
    28 nm vs 5 nm
  • Less advanced frame generation
    This graphics card has less advanced frame generation than the average graphics card (no vs multi frame generation).
  • No DLSS support
    This graphics card does not support DLSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No ray tracing
    This graphics card does not support ray tracing, the average graphics card does.
  • Older PCIe version
    This graphics card supports an older PCIe version than the average graphics card (3 vs 4).
    3 vs 4
  • No AI upscalers
    This graphics card does not support AI upscalers, the average graphics card does.
  • No XeSS support
    This graphics card does not support XeSS, the average graphics card does.
  • No mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, the average graphics card does.
  • Older Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4).
    1.2 vs 1.4
  • No DirectStorage support
    This graphics card does not support DirectStorage, the average graphics card does.
  • No Resizable BAR
    This graphics card does not support Resizable BAR, while the average graphics card does. 76.4% of Graphics cards support it.
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12 vs 12 Ultimate
  • Older shader model
    This graphics card supports an older shader model than the average graphics card (6.5 vs 6.8).
    6.5 vs 6.8
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • Older OpenCL version
    This graphics card supports an older OpenCL version than the average graphics card (2.1 vs 3).
    2.1 vs 3
  • 93.4% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (1,500 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    1,500 million vs 22,900 million
  • Older FSR version
    This graphics card supports an older FSR version than the average graphics card (1 vs 3.1).
    1 vs 3.1
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (1.4a vs 2.1a).
    1.4a vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 1 fewer displays supported
    This graphics card supports fewer displays than the average graphics card (3 vs 4). The average graphics card supports 4 displays.
    3 vs 4
  • 1 fewer DisplayPort outputs
    This graphics card has fewer DisplayPort outputs than the average graphics card (2 vs 3). The average graphics card has 3 DisplayPort outputs.
    2 vs 3
  • No AV1 decoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 decoding, the average graphics card does.
  • No DSC support
    This graphics card does not support DSC, the average graphics card does.
  • No VRR support
    This graphics card does not support VRR, the average graphics card does.
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older DisplayPort version
    This graphics card supports an older DisplayPort version than the average graphics card (1.2 vs 1.4a).
    1.2 vs 1.4a
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (1.4 vs 2.3).
    1.4 vs 2.3
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (2560x1600 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    2560x1600 vs 7680x4320
  • Not VR ready
    This graphics card is not VR ready, while the average graphics card is.
  • 75% lower DisplayPort bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower DisplayPort bandwidth than the average graphics card (5.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps). The average graphics card has DisplayPort bandwidth of 21.6 Gbps.
    5.4 Gbps vs 21.6 Gbps
  • 2 fewer fans
    This graphics card has fewer fans than the average graphics card (1 vs 3).
    1 vs 3
  • No dual BIOS
    This graphics card does not include dual BIOS, the average graphics card does.
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 10 °C lower thermal ceiling
    This graphics card has a lower thermal ceiling than the average graphics card (105 °C vs 95 °C). The average graphics card has a thermal ceiling of 95 °C.
    105 °C vs 95 °C
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • No RGB lighting
    This graphics card does not include RGB lighting, the average graphics card does.
  • 15 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (140 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    140 mm vs 125 mm
  • 97.2% heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (2000 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    2,000 g vs 1,014 g

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

9.0
H9 Gaming
≈ estimated
07/12/2012
Hands-on review · long-term use and game tests
Verdict
ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU is a good-value card worth recommending, though it is large and needs an extra power adapter.
8.0
HiTechLegion
≈ estimated
17/02/2012
Overclocking test · fan noise and temperature comparison
Verdict
ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU overclocks well and stays quiet at moderate speeds with custom fan control, but its auto fan can overheat.
7.0
BenchART
≈ estimated
29/07/2013
Performance review introduction · first impressions and temperatures
Verdict
ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU is a decent card for the money, but 1080p gaming takes a big performance hit.
7.0
VideoTesty
≈ estimated
14/11/2012
Hands-on review · benchmarks, temperatures and noise
Verdict
ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU is the fastest of the 7770 cards tested, but it is noticeably louder than expected under load.
9.0
GAMETIME
≈ estimated
29/05/2012
Hands-on review · game benchmarks and specifications
Verdict
ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU plays most recent games at full detail in Full HD, a strong pick for enthusiast gamers on a budget.
9.0
Motherboards.org
≈ estimated
07/03/2012
Hands-on review · cooling, overclocking and Crossfire value
Verdict
ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU is the best entry-level Crossfire pair you can buy, with strong cooling and easy overclocking.
6.0
H9 Gaming
≈ estimated
06/06/2012
Unboxing · first look at size and included parts
Verdict
ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU is not a bad little card, but it is bigger than expected and the box has no power adapter.
Hands-on video, no verdict
Not graded

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

7.4
computerwoche.de
✓ explicit
16/10/2012
Lab test · Entry-level GPU
Verdict
The Asus HD 7770 DirectCU is a very quiet, cool card that handles multimedia and 1080p games well, but it struggles at the highest Ultra settings.
8.0
pcmasters.de
≈ estimated
31/07/2012
Hands-on review · Mid-range GPU
Verdict
The Asus HD 7770 DirectCU is a mid-range card with a copper-based cooler and a slight clock boost, though its 128-bit memory bus holds back bandwidth.
7.4
pcwelt.de
✓ explicit
02/08/2012
Hands-on test · Quiet GPU
Verdict
The Asus HD 7770 DirectCU stays quiet and cool and runs multimedia and 1080p games well, though it cannot keep up at the very highest Ultra settings.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU

  • Excellent power efficiency, particularly at idle with AMD ZeroCore technology
  • DirectCU cooling solution keeps the card very cool and extremely quiet even under load
  • Comes with a factory overclock that improves performance over the reference design
  • Strong GPU overclocking potential beyond the factory settings
  • Native connectivity for full-size HDMI and DisplayPort

What customers don't like about ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU

  • Poor price-to-performance ratio at launch compared to older or competing cards like the HD 6850 or GTX 460
  • Limited memory overclocking headroom compared to other variants
  • 1GB VRAM version may struggle with modern, memory-intensive games
  • Official driver support from AMD has ended for this older architecture

Verdict

The ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU is a budget-friendly graphics card built on AMD's 28nm GCN architecture, featuring a Cape Verde XT GPU with 640 stream processors and 1GB of GDDR5 memory on a 128-bit bus. It distinguishes itself with the proprietary DirectCU cooling system, which uses flattened copper heat pipes in direct contact with the GPU to deliver 20% cooler and significantly quieter performance than reference designs. Key specifications include a factory-overclocked core speed of 1020 MHz, a 4.6 Gbps effective memory clock, and a low 80W TDP requiring only a single 6-pin power connector. Major pros include its exceptional energy efficiency, support for PCI Express 3.0, and a comprehensive output array including HDMI 1.4a and DisplayPort 1.2. However, main cons involve its limited 1GB VRAM capacity which struggles with modern high-resolution textures, and its lack of high-end performance for demanding contemporary gaming titles.

Compare ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU with other products in the Graphics cards category

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of ASUS Radeon HD 7770 DirectCU and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found