Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce GTX 480

Place in the ranking	431	507
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	1.64	3.54
Power efficiency	2.95	4.98
Architecture	Fermi (2010−2014)	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code name	GF100	Bonaire
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Design	no data	reference
Release date	26 March 2010 (14 years ago)	8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$499	$139

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 260X has 116% better value for money than GTX 480.

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	480	896
Core clock speed	700 MHz	no data
Boost clock speed	no data	1000 MHz
Number of transistors	3,100 million	2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	115 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	42.06	61.60
Floating-point processing power	1.345 TFLOPS	1.971 TFLOPS
ROPs	48	16
TMUs	60	56

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).

Bus support	16x PCI-E 2.0	PCIe 3.0
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	267 mm	170 mm
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin	1 x 6-pin
SLI options	+	-

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	GDDR5	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	4 GB
Memory bus width	384 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	1848 MHz (3696 data rate)	no data
Memory bandwidth	177.4 GB/s	104 GB/s
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	Two Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI	2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support	+	no data
Eyefinity	-	+
HDMI	+	+
HDCP	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	Internal	no data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	-	+
DDMA audio	no data	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_0)	DirectX® 12
Shader Model	5.1	6.3
OpenGL	4.2	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.0
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. 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 480 10.70
+28.9%

R7 260X 8.30

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 480 4113
+28.8%

R7 260X 3193

3DMark Fire Strike Graphics

Fire Strike is a DirectX 11 benchmark for gaming PCs. It features two separate tests displaying a fight between a humanoid and a fiery creature made of lava. Using 1920x1080 resolution, Fire Strike shows off some realistic graphics and is quite taxing on hardware.

GTX 480 3650

R7 260X 4380
+20%

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	20−22 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Elden Ring	30−35 +29.2%	24−27 −29.2%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +29.6%	27−30 −29.6%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +43.3%	30−33 −43.3%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +38.1%	21−24 −38.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +33.3%	21−24 −33.3%
Valorant	40−45 +36.7%	30−33 −36.7%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +29.6%	27−30 −29.6%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Dota 2	35−40 +40.7%	27−30 −40.7%
Elden Ring	30−35 +29.2%	24−27 −29.2%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +43.3%	30−33 −43.3%
Fortnite	60−65 +37.8%	45−50 −37.8%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +43.3%	30−33 −43.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	35−40 +40.7%	27−30 −40.7%
Metro Exodus	27−30 +38.1%	21−24 −38.1%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +36.7%	60−65 −36.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2	27−30 +33.3%	21−24 −33.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−35 +33.3%	24−27 −33.3%
Valorant	40−45 +36.7%	30−33 −36.7%
World of Tanks	150−160 +38.2%	110−120 −38.2%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	35−40 +29.6%	27−30 −29.6%
Counter-Strike 2	20−22 +42.9%	14−16 −42.9%
Cyberpunk 2077	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Dota 2	35−40 +40.7%	27−30 −40.7%
Far Cry 5	40−45 +43.3%	30−33 −43.3%
Forza Horizon 4	40−45 +43.3%	30−33 −43.3%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	80−85 +36.7%	60−65 −36.7%
Valorant	40−45 +36.7%	30−33 −36.7%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	14−16 +40%	10−11 −40%
Elden Ring	14−16 +50%	10−11 −50%
Grand Theft Auto V	14−16 +40%	10−11 −40%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +42.9%	35−40 −42.9%
Red Dead Redemption 2	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
World of Tanks	75−80 +40%	55−60 −40%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Counter-Strike 2	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077	8−9 +33.3%	6−7 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	24−27 +33.3%	18−20 −33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	24−27 +33.3%	18−20 −33.3%
Metro Exodus	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Valorant	24−27 +44.4%	18−20 −44.4%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Dota 2	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Elden Ring	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
Grand Theft Auto V	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Metro Exodus	6−7 +50%	4−5 −50%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	30−35 +29.2%	24−27 −29.2%
Red Dead Redemption 2	7−8 +40%	5−6 −40%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	9−10 +50%	6−7 −50%
Counter-Strike 2	5−6 +66.7%	3−4 −66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Dota 2	21−24 +31.3%	16−18 −31.3%
Far Cry 5	12−14 +30%	10−11 −30%
Fortnite	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%
Forza Horizon 4	14−16 +40%	10−11 −40%
Valorant	10−12 +37.5%	8−9 −37.5%

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	10.70	8.30
Recency	26 March 2010	8 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount	1536 MB	4 GB
Chip lithography	40 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	250 Watt	115 Watt

GTX 480 has a 28.9% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 260X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 117.4% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 260X in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.