Radeon 740M vs GeForce GTX 260M

Place in the ranking	1110	504
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	1.05	38.39
Architecture	Tesla (2006−2010)	RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code name	G92	Phoenix
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	3 March 2009 (15 years ago)	4 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 cores	112	256
Core clock speed	550 MHz	800 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	2500 MHz
Number of transistors	754 million	25,390 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	15 Watt
Texture fill rate	30.80	40.00
Floating-point processing power	0.308 TFLOPS	2.56 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	462	no data
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	56	16
Ray Tracing Cores	no data	4

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
Bus support	PCI-E 2.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 4.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	no data	None
SLI options	2-way	-
MXM Type	MXM 3.0 Type-B	no 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 type	GDDR3	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	1 GB	System Shared
Memory bus width	256 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	Up to 950 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	61 GB/s	no 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 Connectors	DisplayPortSingle Link DVIDual Link DVIVGALVDSHDMI	Portable Device Dependent
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

Supported technologies

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

Power management

8.0

no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	4.0	6.7
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.3
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 740M 8.28
+745%

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 740M 3196
+743%

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 HD

29
+38.1%

−38.1%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

3−4

−367%

14−16
+367%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1900%	20−22 +1900%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −1150%	24−27 +1150%
Hitman 3	5−6 −240%	16−18 +240%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −285%	50−55 +285%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −2300%	24−27 +2300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −314%	27−30 +314%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −84.4%	55−60 +84.4%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1900%	20−22 +1900%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 −1150%	24−27 +1150%
Hitman 3	5−6 −240%	16−18 +240%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −285%	50−55 +285%
Red Dead Redemption 2	1−2 −2300%	24−27 +2300%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −314%	27−30 +314%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −150%	24−27 +150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −84.4%	55−60 +84.4%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	5−6 −320%	21−24 +320%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 −367%	14−16 +367%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −1900%	20−22 +1900%
Hitman 3	5−6 −240%	16−18 +240%
Horizon Zero Dawn	12−14 −285%	50−55 +285%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −314%	27−30 +314%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−11 −150%	24−27 +150%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −84.4%	55−60 +84.4%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

1−2

−2300%

24−27
+2300%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −1600%	16−18 +1600%
Far Cry New Dawn	1−2 −1200%	12−14 +1200%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −700%	8−9 +700%
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −300%	4−5 +300%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −900%	10−11 +900%
Hitman 3	7−8 −71.4%	12−14 +71.4%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −350%	18−20 +350%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	8−9
Watch Dogs: Legion	4−5 −1300%	55−60 +1300%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

3−4

−400%

14−16
+400%

4K
High Preset

Far Cry New Dawn

0−1

6−7

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 −400%	5−6 +400%
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	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Battlefield 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	55−60 +0%	55−60 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Valhalla	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%
Metro Exodus	12−14 +0%	12−14 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	9−10 +0%	9−10 +0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Hitman 3	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 +0%	5−6 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%

This is how GTX 260M and Radeon 740M compete in popular games:

GTX 260M is 38% 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 740M is 2300% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

Radeon 740M is ahead in 43 tests (64%)
there's a draw in 24 tests (36%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	0.98	8.28
Recency	3 March 2009	4 January 2023
Chip lithography	65 nm	4 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	15 Watt

Radeon 740M has a 744.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 13 years, a 1525% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The Radeon 740M 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.