Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce GTX 980

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 980 and Radeon R7 260X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 980
2014
4 GB GDDR5, 165 Watt
28.78
+248%

GTX 980 outperforms R7 260X by a whopping 248% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking193504
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation10.883.39
Power efficiency12.125.00
ArchitectureMaxwell 2.0 (2014−2019)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameGM204Bonaire
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date19 September 2014 (10 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$549 $139

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

GTX 980 has 221% better value for money than R7 260X.

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 cores2048896
Core clock speed1064 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1216 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors5,200 million2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)165 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rate155.661.60
Floating-point processing power4.981 TFLOPS1.971 TFLOPS
ROPs6416
TMUs12856

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 supportPCI Express 3.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm170 mm
Height4.376" (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Recommended system power (PSU)500 Wattno data
Supplementary power connectors2x 6-pin1 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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width256 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed7.0 GB/sno data
Memory bandwidth224 GB/s104 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 ConnectorsDual Link DVI-I, HDMI 2.0, 3x DisplayPort 1.22x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
Eyefinity-+
VGA аnalog display support+no data
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support+no data
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
G-SYNC support+-
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+
DDMA audiono data+
GameStream+-
GeForce ShadowPlay+-
GPU Boost2.0no data
GameWorks+-
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder+-
Optimus+-
BatteryBoost+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (12_1)DirectX® 12
Shader Model6.46.3
OpenGL4.54.6
OpenCL1.22.0
Vulkan1.1.126-
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 980 28.78
+248%
R7 260X 8.27

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 980 11103
+248%
R7 260X 3190

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 980 12938
+195%
R7 260X 4380

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 HD91
+279%
24−27
−279%
1440p50
+257%
14−16
−257%
4K39
+290%
10−12
−290%

Cost per frame, $

1080p6.035.79
1440p10.989.93
4K14.0813.90

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 69
+283%
18−20
−283%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+250%
14−16
−250%
Battlefield 5 86
+258%
24−27
−258%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+269%
16−18
−269%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%
Far Cry 5 84
+250%
24−27
−250%
Far Cry New Dawn 77
+267%
21−24
−267%
Forza Horizon 4 253
+261%
70−75
−261%
Hitman 3 55−60
+269%
16−18
−269%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+269%
35−40
−269%
Metro Exodus 95−100
+263%
27−30
−263%
Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+306%
18−20
−306%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 130
+271%
35−40
−271%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+270%
30−33
−270%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 83
+295%
21−24
−295%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+250%
14−16
−250%
Battlefield 5 74
+252%
21−24
−252%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+269%
16−18
−269%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%
Far Cry 5 69
+283%
18−20
−283%
Far Cry New Dawn 64
+256%
18−20
−256%
Forza Horizon 4 230
+254%
65−70
−254%
Hitman 3 55−60
+269%
16−18
−269%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+269%
35−40
−269%
Metro Exodus 95−100
+263%
27−30
−263%
Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+306%
18−20
−306%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−105
+270%
27−30
−270%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 132
+277%
35−40
−277%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+270%
30−33
−270%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 35
+250%
10−11
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+250%
14−16
−250%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 55−60
+269%
16−18
−269%
Cyberpunk 2077 45−50
+300%
12−14
−300%
Far Cry 5 50
+257%
14−16
−257%
Forza Horizon 4 59
+269%
16−18
−269%
Hitman 3 55−60
+269%
16−18
−269%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+269%
35−40
−269%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 100−105
+270%
27−30
−270%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 46
+283%
12−14
−283%
Watch Dogs: Legion 110−120
+270%
30−33
−270%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 70−75
+306%
18−20
−306%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 47
+292%
12−14
−292%
Far Cry New Dawn 44
+267%
12−14
−267%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27
+286%
7−8
−286%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 27−30
+263%
8−9
−263%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−35
+267%
9−10
−267%
Cyberpunk 2077 20−22
+300%
5−6
−300%
Far Cry 5 33
+267%
9−10
−267%
Forza Horizon 4 147
+268%
40−45
−268%
Hitman 3 35−40
+250%
10−11
−250%
Horizon Zero Dawn 60−65
+275%
16−18
−275%
Metro Exodus 55−60
+293%
14−16
−293%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 65−70
+261%
18−20
−261%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 35−40
+270%
10−11
−270%
Watch Dogs: Legion 150−160
+249%
45−50
−249%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 45−50
+250%
14−16
−250%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 22
+267%
6−7
−267%
Far Cry New Dawn 24
+300%
6−7
−300%
Hitman 3 21−24
+283%
6−7
−283%
Horizon Zero Dawn 140−150
+263%
40−45
−263%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+278%
9−10
−278%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 29
+263%
8−9
−263%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 14
+250%
4−5
−250%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+300%
4−5
−300%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+325%
4−5
−325%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+300%
2−3
−300%
Far Cry 5 16
+300%
4−5
−300%
Forza Horizon 4 34
+278%
9−10
−278%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+270%
10−11
−270%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+333%
3−4
−333%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 24−27
+257%
7−8
−257%

This is how GTX 980 and R7 260X compete in popular games:

  • GTX 980 is 279% faster in 1080p
  • GTX 980 is 257% faster in 1440p
  • GTX 980 is 290% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 28.78 8.27
Recency 19 September 2014 8 October 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 165 Watt 115 Watt

GTX 980 has a 248% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 11 months.

R7 260X, on the other hand, has 43.5% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 980 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.

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 980
GeForce GTX 980
AMD Radeon R7 260X
Radeon R7 260X

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.


4.3 1425 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 980 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 391 vote

Rate Radeon R7 260X 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.