Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient vs GeForce GTX 260 216

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
ArchitectureTesla 2.0 (2007−2013)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameGT200Raven
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Release date16 September 2008 (16 years ago)23 April 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$299 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 cores216384
Core clock speed576 MHz300 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1011 MHz
Number of transistors1,400 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)182 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate41.4724.26
Floating-point processing power0.5365 TFLOPS0.7764 TFLOPS
ROPs288
TMUs7224

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).

InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16IGP
Length267 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pinno data

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 typeGDDR3System Shared
Maximum RAM amount896 MBSystem Shared
Memory bus width448 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed999 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth111.9 GB/sno data
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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x S-VideoNo outputs

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 (12_1)
Shader Model4.06.4
OpenGL3.34.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.2.131
CUDA1.3-

Pros & cons summary


Recency 16 September 2008 23 April 2018
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 182 Watt 15 Watt

Vega 6 Mobile Efficient has an age advantage of 9 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 1113.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 and Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 is a desktop card while Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient is a notebook one.


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 GTX 260 Core 216
GeForce GTX 260 Core 216
AMD Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient
Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient

Comparisons with similar GPUs

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.


4.1 14 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 260 Core 216 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 4 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 6 Mobile Efficient 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.