Ryzen 7 260 vs Ryzen 5 2600

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 5 2600
2018, $199
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
7.45
Ryzen 7 260
2025
8 cores / 16 threads, 45 Watt
16.09
+116%

Ryzen 7 260 outperforms Ryzen 5 2600 by a whopping 116% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1132469
Place by popularity19not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation6.05no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Ryzen 5no data
Power efficiency12.2938.34
DesignerAMDAMD
ManufacturerGlobalFoundriesTSMC
Architecture codenamePinnacle Riege (Zen+) (2018)Hawk Point (2024−2025)
Release date19 April 2018 (7 years ago)6 January 2025 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 260 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores6 (Hexa-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads1216
Base clock speed3.4 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier34no data
L1 cache96K (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache3 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache16 MB (shared)16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography12 nm4 nm
Die size192 mm2178 mm2
Maximum core temperature95 °C100 °C
Number of transistors4,800 million25,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 260 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4FP8
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt45 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 260. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SMERyzen AI, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
Precision Boost 2++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 260 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 260. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR5
Maximum memory size128 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth46.933 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-AMD Radeon 780M

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 260.

PCIe version3.04.0
PCI Express lanes2020

Synthetic benchmarks

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating.

Ryzen 5 2600 7.45
Ryzen 7 260 16.09
+116%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.

Ryzen 5 2600 13145
Samples: 14607
Ryzen 7 260 28365
+116%
Samples: 222

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 5 2600 4726
Ryzen 7 260 7384
+56.2%

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 5 2600 28173
Ryzen 7 260 45689
+62.2%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen 5 2600 1248
Ryzen 7 260 2768
+122%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 5 2600 157
Ryzen 7 260 278
+76.4%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ryzen 5 2600 7.5
Ryzen 7 260 11.4
+52%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Ryzen 5 2600 75
Ryzen 7 260 145
+92.8%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Ryzen 5 2600 205
Ryzen 7 260 269
+31.1%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 5 2600 6070
Ryzen 7 260 9848
+62.3%

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 5 2600 4020
Ryzen 7 260 6439
+60.2%

7-Zip

Ryzen 5 2600 30898
Ryzen 7 260 63076
+104%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.45 16.09
Recency 19 April 2018 6 January 2025
Physical cores 6 8
Threads 12 16
Chip lithography 12 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 45 Watt

Ryzen 7 260 has a 116% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, a 200% more advanced lithography process, and 44.4% lower power consumption.

The AMD Ryzen 7 260 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Ryzen 5 2600 in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 5 2600 is a desktop processor while Ryzen 7 260 is a notebook one.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Ryzen 5 2600
Ryzen 5 2600
AMD Ryzen 7 260
Ryzen 7 260

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 16491 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 2600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 218 votes

Rate Ryzen 7 260 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Ryzen 5 2600 and Ryzen 7 260, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.