Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce GTX TITAN

VS

Aggregate performance score

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

GTX TITAN
2013
6 GB GDDR5, 250 Watt
21.28
+158%

GTX TITAN outperforms R7 260X by a whopping 158% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking255504
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.253.38
Power efficiency5.935.01
ArchitectureKepler (2012−2018)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameGK110Bonaire
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date19 February 2013 (11 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$999 $139

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 260X has 4% better value for money than GTX TITAN.

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 cores2688896
Core clock speed837 MHzno data
Boost clock speed876 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors7,080 million2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rate196.261.60
Floating-point processing power4.709 TFLOPS1.971 TFLOPS
ROPs4816
TMUs22456

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
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1 x 6-pin

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 amount6 GB4 GB
Memory bus width384-bit GDDR5128 Bit
Memory clock speed6.0 GB/sno data
Memory bandwidth288.4 GB/s104 GB/s

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 ConnectorsOne Dual Link DVI-I, One Dual Link DVI-D, One HDMI, One DisplayPort2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support4 displaysno data
Eyefinity-+
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
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+
Blu Ray 3D+-
3D Gaming+-
3D Vision+-
3D Vision Live+-

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.44.6
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 TITAN 21.28
+158%
R7 260X 8.26

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 TITAN 8210
+158%
R7 260X 3188

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 TITAN 10470
+139%
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.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 21.28 8.26
Recency 19 February 2013 8 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount 6 GB 4 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 115 Watt

GTX TITAN has a 157.6% higher aggregate performance score, and a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R7 260X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 7 months, and 117.4% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX TITAN 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 TITAN
GeForce GTX TITAN
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.


3.7 159 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 392 votes

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.