Radeon RX 6800M vs GeForce GTX 260M
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce GTX 260M and Radeon RX 6800M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
6800M outperforms 260M by a whopping 3378% 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 | 1181 | 195 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Power efficiency | 1.08 | 16.81 |
| Architecture | Tesla (2006−2010) | RDNA 2.0 (2020−2025) |
| GPU code name | G92 | Navi 22 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Release date | 3 March 2009 (17 years ago) | 31 May 2021 (4 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 | 112 | 2560 |
| Core clock speed | 550 MHz | 2116 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2390 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 754 million | 17,200 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 145 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 30.80 | 382.4 |
| Floating-point processing power | 0.308 TFLOPS | 12.24 TFLOPS |
| Gigaflops | 462 | no data |
| ROPs | 16 | 64 |
| TMUs | 56 | 160 |
| Ray Tracing Cores | no data | 40 |
| L0 Cache | no data | 640 KB |
| L1 Cache | no data | 512 KB |
| L2 Cache | 64 KB | 3 MB |
| L3 Cache | no data | 96 MB |
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 | large |
| Bus support | PCI-E 2.0 | no data |
| Interface | PCIe 2.0 x16 | PCIe 4.0 x16 |
| 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 | GDDR6 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 12 GB |
| Memory bus width | 256 Bit | 192 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | Up to 950 MHz | 2000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 61 GB/s | 384.0 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | - |
| Resizable BAR | - | + |
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 | DisplayPortSingle Link DVIDual Link DVIVGALVDSHDMI | No outputs |
| 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 and SDK support
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 | 6.5 |
| OpenGL | 2.1 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 1.1 | 2.1 |
| Vulkan | N/A | 1.3 |
| CUDA | + | - |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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.
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.
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
−269%
| 107
+269%
|
| 1440p | 2−3
−3450%
| 71
+3450%
|
| 4K | 1−2
−4200%
| 43
+4200%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−6050%
|
123
+6050%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−5400%
|
110
+5400%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−10500%
|
106
+10500%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−14400%
|
140−150
+14400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1983%
|
120−130
+1983%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 131 |
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1333%
|
120−130
+1333%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−545%
|
200−210
+545%
|
Full HD
High
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 24−27
−1054%
|
270−280
+1054%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−5000%
|
102
+5000%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−800%
|
126
+800%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−10100%
|
102
+10100%
|
| Fortnite | 1−2
−14400%
|
140−150
+14400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1983%
|
120−130
+1983%
|
| Forza Horizon 5 | 0−1 | 125 |
| Metro Exodus | 1−2
−10400%
|
105
+10400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1333%
|
120−130
+1333%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−3033%
|
188
+3033%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−545%
|
200−210
+545%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 2−3
−4800%
|
98
+4800%
|
| Dota 2 | 14−16
−721%
|
115
+721%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 1−2
−9400%
|
95
+9400%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 6−7
−1983%
|
120−130
+1983%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 9−10
−1333%
|
120−130
+1333%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 6−7
−1717%
|
109
+1717%
|
| Valorant | 30−35
−545%
|
200−210
+545%
|
Full HD
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−14400%
|
140−150
+14400%
|
1440p
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 4−5
−1800%
|
75−80
+1800%
|
| Counter-Strike: Global Offensive | 5−6
−4400%
|
220−230
+4400%
|
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 10−11
−1650%
|
170−180
+1650%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 0−1 | 51 |
| Far Cry 5 | 0−1 | 100 |
| Forza Horizon 4 | 3−4
−2800%
|
85−90
+2800%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
−2700%
|
55−60
+2700%
|
1440p
Epic
| Fortnite | 1−2
−8100%
|
80−85
+8100%
|
4K
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 14−16
−507%
|
85
+507%
|
| Valorant | 4−5
−4775%
|
190−200
+4775%
|
4K
Ultra
| PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS | 2−3
−1850%
|
35−40
+1850%
|
4K
Epic
| Fortnite | 2−3
−1850%
|
35−40
+1850%
|
Full HD
Low
| Counter-Strike 2 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| Resident Evil 4 Remake | 128
+0%
|
128
+0%
|
Full HD
Medium
| Battlefield 5 | 143
+0%
|
143
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
Full HD
High
| Battlefield 5 | 141
+0%
|
141
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 180−190
+0%
|
180−190
+0%
|
| Grand Theft Auto V | 112
+0%
|
112
+0%
|
Full HD
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 139
+0%
|
139
+0%
|
1440p
High
| Grand Theft Auto V | 84
+0%
|
84
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 59
+0%
|
59
+0%
|
| Valorant | 230−240
+0%
|
230−240
+0%
|
1440p
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 130
+0%
|
130
+0%
|
4K
High
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Metro Exodus | 38
+0%
|
38
+0%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 60
+0%
|
60
+0%
|
4K
Ultra
| Battlefield 5 | 82
+0%
|
82
+0%
|
| Counter-Strike 2 | 35−40
+0%
|
35−40
+0%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 23
+0%
|
23
+0%
|
| Dota 2 | 95
+0%
|
95
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 61
+0%
|
61
+0%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 55−60
+0%
|
55−60
+0%
|
This is how GTX 260M and RX 6800M compete in popular games:
- RX 6800M is 269% faster in 1080p
- RX 6800M is 3450% faster in 1440p
- RX 6800M is 4200% faster in 4K
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the RX 6800M is 14400% faster.
All in all, in popular games:
- RX 6800M performs better in 35 tests (63%)
- there's a draw in 21 tests (38%)
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.91 | 31.65 |
| Recency | 3 March 2009 | 31 May 2021 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 1 GB | 12 GB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 145 Watt |
GTX 260M has 123% lower power consumption.
RX 6800M, on the other hand, has a 3378% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 1100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 829% more advanced lithography process.
The Radeon RX 6800M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M 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.
