Radeon 660M vs GeForce GTX 260M

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 260M and Radeon 660M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 260M
2009
1 GB GDDR3, 65 Watt
0.98

660M outperforms GTX 260M by a whopping 1564% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1111332
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Power efficiency1.0327.94
ArchitectureTesla (2006−2010)RDNA 2.0 (2020−2024)
GPU code nameG92Rembrandt+
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date3 March 2009 (15 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year 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 cores112384
Core clock speed550 MHz1500 MHz
Boost clock speedno data1900 MHz
Number of transistors754 million13,100 million
Manufacturing process technology65 nm6 nm
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate30.8045.60
Floating-point processing power0.308 TFLOPS1.459 TFLOPS
Gigaflops462no data
ROPs1616
TMUs5624
Ray Tracing Coresno data6

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 sizelargeno data
Bus supportPCI-E 2.0no data
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectorsno dataNone
SLI options2-way-
MXM TypeMXM 3.0 Type-Bno 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 amount1 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width256 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speedUp to 950 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth61 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 ConnectorsDisplayPortSingle Link DVIDual Link DVIVGALVDSHDMIPortable Device Dependent
HDMI+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIS/PDIFno data

Supported technologies

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

Power management8.0no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX11.1 (10_0)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model4.06.7
OpenGL2.14.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A1.3
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.

GTX 260M 0.98
Radeon 660M 16.31
+1564%

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark. It gives the graphics card a thorough evaluation under various types of load, providing four separate benchmarks for Direct3D versions 9, 10, 11 and 12 (the last being done in 4K resolution if possible), and few more tests engaging DirectCompute capabilities.

GTX 260M 379
Radeon 660M 6285
+1558%

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.

GTX 260M 4901
Radeon 660M 23222
+374%

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 HD29
+16%
25
−16%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−700%
24
+700%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−360%
21−24
+360%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−567%
20
+567%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2200%
21−24
+2200%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%
Hitman 3 5−6
−320%
21
+320%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−315%
50−55
+315%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−357%
30−35
+357%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−93.8%
60−65
+93.8%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−360%
21−24
+360%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−367%
14
+367%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2200%
21−24
+2200%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−1250%
27−30
+1250%
Hitman 3 5−6
−320%
21
+320%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−315%
50−55
+315%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−371%
33
+371%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−160%
24−27
+160%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−93.8%
60−65
+93.8%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
−360%
21−24
+360%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−400%
14−16
+400%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−2200%
21−24
+2200%
Hitman 3 5−6
−280%
18−20
+280%
Horizon Zero Dawn 12−14
−69.2%
22
+69.2%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
−286%
27
+286%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
−50%
15
+50%
Watch Dogs: Legion 30−35
−93.8%
60−65
+93.8%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 1−2
−2600%
27−30
+2600%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−1800%
18−20
+1800%
Far Cry New Dawn 1−2
−1400%
14−16
+1400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−900%
10−11
+900%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−400%
5−6
+400%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1000%
10−12
+1000%
Hitman 3 7−8
−85.7%
12−14
+85.7%
Horizon Zero Dawn 4−5
−400%
20−22
+400%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 9−10
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
−1450%
60−65
+1450%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−433%
16−18
+433%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn 0−1 7−8

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 1−2
−500%
6−7
+500%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 4−5
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 0−1 4−5
Far Cry 5 0−1 5−6

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 2−3
−350%
9−10
+350%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 26
+0%
26
+0%
Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 19
+0%
19
+0%
Battlefield 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Hitman 3 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Metro Exodus 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

This is how GTX 260M and Radeon 660M compete in popular games:

  • GTX 260M is 16% faster in 1080p

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

  • in Red Dead Redemption 2, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the Radeon 660M is 2600% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • Radeon 660M is ahead in 43 tests (64%)
  • there's a draw in 24 tests (36%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.98 16.31
Recency 3 March 2009 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 65 nm 6 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 40 Watt

Radeon 660M has a 1564.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 983.3% more advanced lithography process, and 62.5% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 660M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M 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 GTX 260M
GeForce GTX 260M
AMD Radeon 660M
Radeon 660M

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.


3.2 15 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 324 votes

Rate Radeon 660M 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.