Radeon HD 7290 vs GeForce GTX 260M SLI
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 260M SLI and Radeon HD 7290, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
GTX 260M SLI outperforms HD 7290 by a whopping 1065% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in the ranking | 789 | 1394 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.54 | 1.10 |
| Architecture | G9x (2007−2010) | TeraScale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | NB9E-GTX | Loveland |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 2 March 2009 (16 years ago) | 6 June 2012 (13 years ago) |
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 cores | 224 | 80 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 400 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 400 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 1508 Million | 450 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 18 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | no data | 3.200 |
| Floating-point processing power | no data | 0.064 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | no data | 4 |
| TMUs | no data | 8 |
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 size | large | no data |
| Interface | no data | IGP |
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 type | GDDR3 | System Shared |
| Maximum RAM amount | 2 GB | System Shared |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | System Shared |
| Memory clock speed | 950 MHz | System Shared |
| Shared memory | - | + |
Connectivity and outputs
This section shows the types and number of video connectors on each GPU. The data applies specifically to desktop reference models (for example, NVIDIA’s Founders Edition). OEM partners often modify both the number and types of ports. On notebook GPUs, video‐output options are determined by the laptop’s design rather than the graphics chip itself.
| Display Connectors | no data | No outputs |
API and SDK compatibility
List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 10 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | no data | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | no data | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | - | N/A |
| 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.
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.
Gaming performance
Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| God of War | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+400%
|
3−4
−400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| God of War | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+88%
|
24−27
−88%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike 2 | 10−11 | 0−1 |
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 55−60
+338%
|
12−14
−338%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−33
+233%
|
9−10
−233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Fortnite | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+400%
|
3−4
−400%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 7−8 | 0−1 |
| God of War | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+88%
|
24−27
−88%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 10−12 | 0−1 |
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 6−7
+500%
|
1−2
−500%
|
| Dota 2 | 30−33
+233%
|
9−10
−233%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 14−16
+400%
|
3−4
−400%
|
| God of War | 8−9
+100%
|
4−5
−100%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 14−16
+100%
|
7−8
−100%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 10−11
+100%
|
5−6
−100%
|
| Valorant | 45−50
+88%
|
24−27
−88%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 16−18
+1600%
|
1−2
−1600%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Counter-Strike 2 | 6−7
+200%
|
2−3
−200%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 21−24
+2200%
|
1−2
−2200%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Metro Exodus | 1−2 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 27−30
+800%
|
3−4
−800%
|
| Valorant | 30−33
+1400%
|
2−3
−1400%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 5−6 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 7−8
+600%
|
1−2
−600%
|
| God of War | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3−4 | 0−1 |
1440p
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 6−7 | 0−1 |
4K
High Preset
| Grand Theft Auto V | 16−18
+6.7%
|
14−16
−6.7%
|
| Valorant | 14−16
+650%
|
2−3
−650%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 0−1 |
| Dota 2 | 9−10 | 0−1 |
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4 | 0−1 |
| God of War | 2−3 | 0−1 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 4−5
+300%
|
1−2
−300%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Fortnite | 4−5
+100%
|
2−3
−100%
|
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS, with 1440p resolution and the High Preset, the GTX 260M SLI is 800% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- Without exception, GTX 260M SLI surpassed HD 7290 in all 29 of our tests.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.03 | 0.26 |
| Recency | 2 March 2009 | 6 June 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 55 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 150 Watt | 18 Watt |
GTX 260M SLI has a 1065.4% higher aggregate performance score.
HD 7290, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 37.5% more advanced lithography process, and 733.3% lower power consumption.
The GeForce GTX 260M SLI is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 7290 in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
