Radeon R7 M260 vs GeForce 9800M GT SLI

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce 9800M GT SLI and Radeon R7 M260, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

9800M GT SLI
2008
512 MB GDDR3, 130 Watt
2.04
+54.5%

9800M GT SLI outperforms R7 M260 by an impressive 55% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking8871031
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.03
Power efficiency1.08no data
ArchitectureG9x (2007−2010)GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code nameNB9E-GT2Topaz
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date15 July 2008 (16 years ago)11 June 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores192384
Compute unitsno data6
Core clock speed500 MHz940 MHz
Boost clock speedno data980 MHz
Number of transistors1508 Million1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)130 Wattno data
Texture fill rateno data23.52
Floating-point processing powerno data0.7526 TFLOPS
ROPsno data8
TMUsno data24

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizelargemedium sized
Bus supportno dataPCIe 3.0 x8
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options+-

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount512 MB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed800 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data14.4 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display Connectorsno dataNo outputs

Supported technologies

Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.

FreeSync-+
HD3D-+
PowerTune-+
DualGraphics-+
ZeroCore-+
Switchable graphics-+

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX10DirectX® 12
Shader Modelno data6.3
OpenGLno data4.3
OpenCLno data2.0
Mantle-+
CUDA+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark score. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

9800M GT SLI 2.04
+54.5%
R7 M260 1.32

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

9800M GT SLI 6271
+15.6%
R7 M260 5425

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD18−21
+38.5%
13
−38.5%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data61.46

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Elden Ring 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Dota 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Elden Ring 3−4
+200%
1−2
−200%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Fortnite 10−11
+100%
5−6
−100%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
Grand Theft Auto V 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+14.3%
7−8
−14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+125%
4
−125%
World of Tanks 35−40
+39.3%
27−30
−39.3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+11.1%
9−10
−11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+25%
4−5
−25%
Dota 2 4−5
+300%
1−2
−300%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Forza Horizon 4 10−12
+22.2%
9−10
−22.2%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%

1440p
High Preset

Elden Ring 1−2 0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
+75%
8−9
−75%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
World of Tanks 12−14
+85.7%
7−8
−85.7%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+50%
2−3
−50%
Far Cry 5 6−7
+20%
5−6
−20%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%
Fortnite 0−1 0−1
Valorant 2−3
+100%
1−2
−100%

This is how 9800M GT SLI and R7 M260 compete in popular games:

  • 9800M GT SLI is 38% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Battlefield 5, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the 9800M GT SLI is 300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • 9800M GT SLI is ahead in 37 tests (84%)
  • there's a draw in 7 tests (16%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.04 1.32
Recency 15 July 2008 11 June 2014
Maximum RAM amount 512 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 65 nm 28 nm

9800M GT SLI has a 54.5% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 M260, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

The GeForce 9800M GT SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M260 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

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


NVIDIA GeForce 9800M GT SLI
GeForce 9800M GT SLI
AMD Radeon R7 M260
Radeon R7 M260

Other comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


No user ratings yet.

Rate GeForce 9800M GT SLI on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 226 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M260 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.