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

GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC review: 117 specs compared

Avg. price:~£45VRAM:4 GBMemory bus width:256 bitThermal Design Power (TDP):145 W

GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC Review: Compare 117 technical specifications and 2 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Graphics cards category and whether it is worth buying.

GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC
5.7/10

Overall score

Score
5.7/ 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 92% of models
Score components

40%

4.5

Technical score

25%

4.5

Reviews score

25%

?

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

10%

9.0

Sentiment score

â–¼Worse than 92% of graphics cards
7.0

Value for money

Value for money
7.0/ 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 75% of models
Score components

70%

5.7

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–¼Worse than 75%
4.5

Technical score

Technical score
4.5/ 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 90% of models
Score components

44%

2.4

Performance

24%

3.8

Memory

12%

9.2

Power

11%

6.6

Features

5%

7.2

Design

4%

8.2

Connectivity

â–¼Worse than 90%
4.5

Reviews score

Reviews score
4.5/ 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–¼ Worse than 92% of models

4.5

Mark 7.9 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

8.2

Average grade

20%

6.5

Popularity

Grades by review (2)
1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 1 video review, 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–¼Worse than 92%
?

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
  • gigabyte-geforce-gtx-970-windforce-3x-oc
gigabyte-geforce-gtx-970-windforce-3x-oc
Where to buy
    N/A~ £45
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.

What owners say about the GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC

Based on 232 owners sharing their experience in online comments

76%positive12%mixed12%negative

Owners praise its long-lasting gaming performance, while memory limits and aging speed hold it back in newer games.

What owners dislike

  • Owners say newer demanding games often run at only 35 to 45 fps at 1080p, forcing them to lower settings or consider upgrading.22
  • Games that need more than the card's usable 3.5 GB of video memory can cause frame drops, stutter or crashes at 1080p or 1440p, especially at high textures.8
  • Owners say the card was advertised as 4 GB but only 3.5 GB runs at full speed, and some felt misled and sought refunds or returns.8
  • Owners report microstutter and frame drops, often when games push past about 3.5 GB of video memory at high texture settings.7
  • Some owners report temperatures near 75 degrees Celsius under load, with one card in a pair running hotter than the other.3
  • Owners report real-world results well below review benchmarks, often around 45 fps average with dips into the 30s in demanding areas.3

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

Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of graphics card GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC

Technical score
Technical score
4.5/ 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 90% of models
Score components:

44%

2.4

Performance

24%

3.8

Memory

12%

9.2

Power

11%

6.6

Features

5%

7.2

Design

4%

8.2

Connectivity

4.5
Reviews score
4.5
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.0/ 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 75% of models
Score components:

70%

5.7

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.0
3DMark Time Spy benchmark score
3,600 points
Market range: <4.1k points – >30.1k points
This graphics card scores 3,600 points in 3DMark Time Spy, which is lower than 91.6% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% 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
9,640 points
Market range: <7.7k points – >36k points
This graphics card scores 9,640 points in PassMark G3D, which is lower than 85.1% of graphics cards.
PassMark (DirectCompute) result
4,077 points
Market range: <3.1k points – >26.3k points
This graphics card scores 4,077 points in PassMark DirectCompute, which is lower than 86.4% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
FP32 performance
3.71 TFLOPS
Market range: <3.94 TFLOPS – >56.3 TFLOPS
This graphics card delivers 3.71 TFLOPS FP32 performance, which is lower than that of 90.1% of graphics cards.
Show more
VRAM
4 GB
Market range: <4 GB – >16 GB
This graphics card has 4 GB of VRAM, which is less than 87.7% of graphics cards and equal to 6% 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
256 bit
Market range: <128 bit – >384 bit
This graphics card uses a 256 bit memory bus, which is wider than that of 50.7% of graphics cards and equal to that of 35.5% of graphics cards.
Maximum memory bandwidth
224.4 GB/s
Market range: <168 GB/s – >960 GB/s
This graphics card reaches 224.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, which is lower than that of 83.1% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
Effective memory speed
7,012 MHz
Market range: <7k MHz – >28k MHz
This graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 7,012 MHz, which is slower than that of 88.9% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.4% 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
12.1
This graphics card supports DirectX 12.1, which is older than on 77.2% of graphics cards and equal to 4.5% of graphics cards.
Vulkan version
1.3
This graphics card supports Vulkan 1.3, which is older than on 79.2% of graphics cards and equal to 15.6% 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
4
Market range: <4 – >4
This graphics card supports up to 4 displays, which is more than 9% of graphics cards and equal to 88.2% of graphics cards.
Max digital resolution
4096x2160
This graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 4096x2160, which is lower than that of 92.4% of graphics cards and equal to that of 4.6% of graphics cards.
DisplayPort outputs
3
Market range: <1 – >3
This graphics card offers 3 DisplayPort outputs, which is more than 21.7% of graphics cards and equal to 76% 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
Thermal Design Power (TDP)
145 W
Market range: <86 W – >360 W
This graphics card has a TDP of 145 W, which is lower than that of 75.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 2.6% of graphics cards.
Power consumption while under peak load
243 W
Market range: <106 W – >365 W
This graphics card draws 243 W under peak load, which is higher than 55.8% of graphics cards and equal to 0.1% of graphics cards.
Recommended PSU wattage
550 W
Market range: <450 W – >850 W
This graphics card recommends a 550 W PSU, which is lower than that of 61.8% of graphics cards and equal to that of 13.3% of graphics cards.
Board power limit
148 W
Market range: <107 W – >400 W
This graphics card has a board power limit of 148 W, which is lower than that of 77.5% of graphics cards and equal to that of 0.2% of graphics cards.
PCIe power spec
145 W
Show more
Size
297x 129x 43 mm
Length
297 mm
Market range: <200 mm – >337 mm
This graphics card is 297 mm long, which is longer than 55.3% of graphics cards and equal in length to 0.7% of graphics cards.
Height
129 mm
Market range: <109 mm – >146 mm
This graphics card is 129 mm tall, which is taller than 58.1% of graphics cards and equal in height to 0.9% 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
1,410 g
Market range: <541 g – >2k g
This graphics card weighs 1,410 g, which is heavier than 71.1% of Graphics cards and equal to 0.2% of Graphics cards.
Show more

GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC vs the average graphics card

246810TotalPerformanceMemoryFeaturesConnectivityPowerDesign
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 32.6% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (145 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    145 W vs 215 W
  • 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
  • 15.4% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (550 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    550 W vs 650 W
  • 3 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (3 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    3 vs 0
  • 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
  • 11.56x cheaper
    GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC is cheaper than the average graphics card (£45 vs £520).
    £45 vs £520
  • 32.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (148 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    148 W vs 220 W
  • 11.56x cheaper
    GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC is cheaper than the average graphics card (£45 vs £520).
    £45 vs £520
  • 15.4% higher sentiment score
    9.0 vs 7.8
  • 64 bit wider memory bus
    This graphics card has a wider memory bus than the average graphics card (256 bit vs 192 bit). The average graphics card has a memory bus width of 192 bit.
    256 bit vs 192 bit
  • 0.2% faster VRAM clock
    This graphics card has a higher VRAM clock than the average graphics card (1,753 MHz vs 1,750 MHz). The average graphics card runs its VRAM at 1,750 MHz.
    1,753 MHz vs 1,750 MHz
  • 3 more GPUs supported
    This graphics card supports more GPUs in multi-GPU mode than the average graphics card (3 vs 0). The average graphics card supports 0 GPUs in multi-GPU mode.
    3 vs 0
  • Supports multi-GPU linking
    This graphics card supports multi-GPU linking, the average graphics card does not.
  • Supports NVLink
    This graphics card supports NVLink, the average graphics card does not.
  • 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
  • 32.6% lower TDP
    This graphics card has a lower TDP than the average graphics card (145 W vs 215 W). The average graphics card has a TDP of 215 W.
    145 W vs 215 W
  • 15.4% lower PSU requirement
    This graphics card has a lower PSU requirement than the average graphics card (550 W vs 650 W). The average graphics card has a PSU requirement of 650 W.
    550 W vs 650 W
  • 32.7% lower board power limit
    This graphics card has a lower board power limit than the average graphics card (148 W vs 220 W). The average graphics card has a board power limit of 220 W.
    148 W vs 220 W
  • 7 °C lower idle temperature
    This graphics card has a lower idle temperature than the average graphics card (30 °C vs 37 °C). The average graphics card has an idle temperature of 37 °C.
    30 °C vs 37 °C
  • 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
  • 50% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,253 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,253 MHz vs 2,505 MHz
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 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
  • 27 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (13 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    13 vs 40
  • 37.5% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.5/ 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–¼ Worse than 92% of models

    4.5

    Mark 7.9 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 1 video review, 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.
    4.5 vs 7.2
  • 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).
  • 42% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,114 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,114 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 37.5% lower review score
    Reviews score
    4.5/ 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–¼ Worse than 92% of models

    4.5

    Mark 7.9 is below the typical mark 7.9 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

    80%

    8.2

    Average grade

    20%

    6.5

    Popularity

    Grades by review (2)
    1 review, its grade estimated from the review text. 1 video review, 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.
    4.5 vs 7.2
  • 6.2% worse value for money
    GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC has worse value for money than the average graphics card (6.98 vs 7.4).
    6.98 vs 7.41
  • 50% lower boost clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower boost GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,253 MHz vs 2,505 MHz). The average graphics card has a boost GPU clock of 2,505 MHz.
    1,253 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
  • 27 fewer compute units
    This graphics card has fewer compute units than the average graphics card (13 vs 40). The average graphics card has 40 compute units.
    13 vs 40
  • 42% lower base clock speed
    This graphics card has a lower base GPU clock than the average graphics card (1,114 MHz vs 1920 MHz). The average graphics card has a base GPU clock of 1920 MHz.
    1,114 MHz vs 1,920 MHz
  • 80 fewer TMUs
    This graphics card has fewer TMUs than the average graphics card (104 vs 184). The average graphics card has 184 TMUs.
    104 vs 184
  • 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
  • 61.3% lower pixel rate
    This graphics card has a lower pixel rate than the average graphics card (62.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s). The average graphics card has a pixel rate of 161.3 GPixel/s.
    62.4 GPixel/s vs 161.3 GPixel/s
  • 54.2% lower texture rate
    This graphics card has a lower texture rate than the average graphics card (173.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s). The average graphics card has a texture rate of 378 GTexel/s.
    173.2 GTexel/s vs 378 GTexel/s
  • 83.6% lower FP32 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP32 performance than the average graphics card (3.7 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP32 performance of 22.6 TFLOPS.
    3.71 TFLOPS vs 22.6 TFLOPS
  • 9 years older
    This graphics card was released earlier than the average graphics card (2014 vs 2023).
    September 2014
    2014 vs 2023
  • 57.4% lower PassMark score
    This graphics card has a lower PassMark score than the average graphics card (9,640 points vs 22,638 points). The average graphics card has a PassMark score of 22,638 points.
    9,640 points vs 22,638 points
  • 75.6% lower gaming score
    This graphics card has a lower gaming score than the average graphics card (3,600 points vs 14,779 points). The average graphics card has a gaming score of 14,779 points.
    3,600 points vs 14,779 points
  • 8 fewer ROPs
    This graphics card has fewer ROPs than the average graphics card (56 vs 64). The average graphics card has 64 ROPs.
    56 vs 64
  • 66.2% lower compute score
    This graphics card has a lower compute score than the average graphics card (4,077 points vs 12,70.5 points). The average graphics card has a compute score of 12,070.5 points.
    4,077 points vs 12,070.5 points
  • 86.7% lower FP16 performance
    This graphics card has a lower FP16 performance than the average graphics card (3.9 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS). The average graphics card has FP16 performance of 29.5 TFLOPS.
    3.92 TFLOPS vs 29.5 TFLOPS
  • 75% 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.
    0.12 TFLOPS vs 0.48 TFLOPS
  • 2,688 fewer FP32 units
    This graphics card has fewer FP32 units than the average graphics card (1,664 vs 4,352). The average graphics card has 4,352 FP32 units.
    1,664 vs 4,352
  • 8 GB less VRAM
    This graphics card has fewer VRAM than the average graphics card (4 GB vs 12 GB). The average graphics card has 12 GB VRAM.
    4 GB vs 12 GB
  • 63.1% slower memory speed
    This graphics card has a lower effective memory speed than the average graphics card (7,012 MHz vs 19,000 MHz). The average graphics card reaches an effective memory speed of 19,000 MHz.
    7,012 MHz vs 19,000 MHz
  • 49.9% lower memory bandwidth
    This graphics card has a lower memory bandwidth than the average graphics card (224.4 GB/s vs 448 GB/s). The average graphics card has a memory bandwidth of 448 GB/s.
    224.4 GB/s vs 448 GB/s
  • 95.8% smaller L2 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L2 cache than the average graphics card (1 MB vs 24 MB). The average graphics card has 24 MB L2 cache.
    1 MB vs 24 MB
  • 62.5% smaller L1 cache
    This graphics card has fewer L1 cache than the average graphics card (48 KB vs 128 KB). The average graphics card has 128 KB L1 cache.
    48 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 mesh shaders
    This graphics card does not support mesh shaders, 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 Vulkan version
    This graphics card supports an older Vulkan version than the average graphics card (1.3 vs 1.4).
    1.3 vs 1.4
  • Older DirectX version
    This graphics card supports an older DirectX version than the average graphics card (12.1 vs 12 Ultimate).
    12.1 vs 12 Ultimate
  • No sampler feedback
    This graphics card does not support sampler feedback, the average graphics card does.
  • 77.3% fewer transistors
    This graphics card has fewer transistors than the average graphics card (5,200 million vs 22,900 million). The average graphics card has 22,900 million transistors.
    5,200 million vs 22,900 million
  • 35.4% larger GPU die
    This graphics card has a higher GPU die size than the average graphics card (398 mm² vs 294 mm²). The average graphics card has a GPU die size of 294 mm².
    398 mm² vs 294 mm²
  • Older HDMI version
    This graphics card supports an older HDMI version than the average graphics card (2 vs 2.1a).
    2.0 vs 2.1a
  • No AV1 encoding
    This graphics card does not support AV1 encoding, the average graphics card does.
  • 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.
  • 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
  • More basic codec support
    This graphics card encodes more basic formats than the average graphics card (H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9).
    H.264/H.265 vs H.264/H.265/AV1/VP9
  • Older NVDEC generation
    This graphics card has a lower NVDEC generation than the average graphics card (1 vs 6). The average graphics card offers NVDEC generation 6.
    1 vs 6
  • Lower display resolution
    This graphics card supports a lower maximum digital resolution than the average graphics card (4096x2160 vs 7680x4320). The average graphics card supports a maximum digital resolution of 7680x4320.
    4096x2160 vs 7680x4320
  • Older HDCP version
    This graphics card supports an older HDCP version than the average graphics card (2.2 vs 2.3).
    2.2 vs 2.3
  • 2 fewer monitors per output type
    This graphics card supports fewer monitors per output type than the average graphics card (1 vs 3). The average graphics card supports 3 monitors per output type.
    1 vs 3
  • 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
  • No fan stop
    This graphics card does not support fan stop, the average graphics card does.
  • 29 dB noisier at idle
    This graphics card has a higher idle noise level than the average graphics card (29 dB vs 0 dB). The average graphics card has an idle noise level of 0 dB.
    29 dB vs 0 dB
  • 6.4 dB noisier under load
    This graphics card has a higher load noise level than the average graphics card (41.8 dB vs 35.4 dB). The average graphics card has a load noise level of 35.4 dB.
    41.8 dB vs 35.4 dB
  • 58.3% higher idle power draw
    This graphics card has a higher idle power draw than the average graphics card (19 W vs 12 W). The average graphics card has an idle power draw of 12 W.
    19 W vs 12 W
  • No backplate
    This graphics card does not include a backplate, the average graphics card does.
  • 4 mm higher card profile
    This graphics card is taller than the average graphics card (129 mm vs 125 mm). The average graphics card has a height of 125 mm.
    129 mm vs 125 mm
  • 14.8 mm longer card length
    This graphics card is longer than the average graphics card (297 mm vs 282.2 mm). The average graphics card has a length of 282.2 mm.
    297 mm vs 282.2 mm
  • 39.1% heavier
    This graphics card is heavier than the average graphics card (1,410 g vs 1,014 g). The average graphics card weighs 1,014 g.
    1,410 g vs 1,014 g

Video reviews

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

9.0
SuperHDView
≈ estimated
12/12/2014
Unboxing and benchmark test · 2K gaming check
Verdict
GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC delivers very high performance and smooth 2K gaming on Ultra settings, and it looks impressive.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

8.0
tomshardware.com
≈ estimated
19/09/2014
Lab test · Cooler and connectors
Verdict
The Gigabyte GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC is a thin, fairly quiet dual-slot card with six video outputs, but its fans spin too fast at idle.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC

  • Excellent cooling performance with the Windforce 3X system keeping temperatures low under load
  • Whisper-quiet operation even when fans are active during gaming
  • Strong factory overclock and significant additional overclocking headroom
  • Great value for money, providing performance close to the flagship GTX 980 at a lower price
  • Solid build quality including a protective metal backplate for stability (on certain revisions)
  • Generous port selection including three DisplayPorts and HDMI 2.0

What customers don't like about GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC

  • VRAM controversy regarding the 3.5GB high-speed limit (advertised as 4GB) which can cause stuttering in VRAM-heavy games
  • Considerable length (approx. 312mm) which may not fit in smaller PC cases
  • Reports of audible coil whine in some units under high stress
  • Criticism of Gigabyte's customer service and RMA process times
  • Lack of customizable RGB lighting on older revisions (fixed blue LED 'Windforce' logo)

Verdict

The Gigabyte GeForce GTX 970 Windforce 3X OC is a performance-tier graphics card based on the 28nm Maxwell 2.0 architecture, featuring 1,664 CUDA cores and a factory-overclocked base clock of 1114 MHz (1253 MHz boost). It is equipped with 4GB of GDDR5 memory on a 256-bit bus and utilizes the signature Windforce 3X triple-fan cooling system to manage its 148W TDP. Main pros include its excellent thermal performance, high overclocking headroom, and versatile 'Flex Display' connectivity with six total video outputs (3x DisplayPort, 1x HDMI 2.0, and 2x DVI). Notable cons include the segmented VRAM issue where only 3.5GB of the 4GB operates at full speed, its significant physical length of 312mm which may not fit in smaller cases, and potential audible coil whine under heavy load.

Compare GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC 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 GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 WINDFORCE 3X OC and other products in the Graphics cards category

No results found