Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB
Aggregate performance score
We've compared GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB and Radeon R7 260X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.
RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB outperforms R7 260X by a whopping 619% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 29 | 477 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 29.92 | 1.27 |
| Architecture | Ada Lovelace | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) |
| GPU code name | AD106 | Bonaire |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Design | no data | reference |
| Release date | 18 May 2023 (1 year ago) | 8 October 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $499 | $139 |
| Current price | $615 (1.2x MSRP) | $204 (1.5x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB has 2256% better value for money than R7 260X.
Detailed specifications
General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.
| Pipelines / CUDA cores | 4352 | 896 |
| Core clock speed | 2310 MHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2535 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Number of transistors | 22,900 million | 2,080 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 5 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 165 Watt | 115 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 344.8 | 61.60 |
| Floating-point performance | no data | 1,971 gflops |
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 | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Interface | PCIe 4.0 x8 | PCIe 3.0 x16 |
| Length | 240 mm | 170 mm |
| Width | 2-slot | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | 1x 16-pin | 1 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 type | GDDR6 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 4 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 18000 MHz | no data |
| Memory bandwidth | 288.0 GB/s | 104 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
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 | 1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a | 2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort |
| Eyefinity | no data | 1 |
| HDMI | + | + |
| DisplayPort support | no data | - |
Supported technologies
Supported technological solutions. This information will prove useful if you need some particular technology for your purposes.
| AppAcceleration | no data | - |
| Enduro | no data | - |
| FreeSync | no data | 1 |
| HD3D | no data | - |
| PowerTune | no data | - |
| TrueAudio | no data | - |
| ZeroCore | no data | - |
| DDMA audio | no data | + |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 Ultimate (12_2) | DirectX® 12 |
| Shader Model | 6.7 | 6.3 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 4.6 |
| OpenCL | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| Vulkan | 1.3 | no data |
| Mantle | no data | - |
| CUDA | 8.9 | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Non-gaming benchmark performance comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance 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.
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB outperforms Radeon R7 260X by 619% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Passmark
This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.
Benchmark coverage: 25%
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB outperforms Radeon R7 260X by 619% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB outperforms Radeon R7 260X by 637% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.
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 | 166
+690%
| 21−24
−690%
|
| 1440p | 92
+667%
| 12−14
−667%
|
| 4K | 54
+671%
| 7−8
−671%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 650−700
+577%
|
95−100
−577%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 700−750
+580%
|
100−110
−580%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1350−1400
+614%
|
180−190
−614%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 750−800
+576%
|
110−120
−576%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 750−800
+576%
|
110−120
−576%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 1000−1050
+599%
|
140−150
−599%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1350−1400
+596%
|
190−200
−596%
|
| Hitman 3 | 800−850
+602%
|
110−120
−602%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 2800−2850
+609%
|
395
−609%
|
| Metro Exodus | 950−1000
+593%
|
130−140
−593%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 850−900
+614%
|
110−120
−614%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 2450−2500
+612%
|
344
−612%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 850−900
+585%
|
120−130
−585%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 650−700
+577%
|
95−100
−577%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 700−750
+580%
|
100−110
−580%
|
| Battlefield 5 | 1350−1400
+614%
|
180−190
−614%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 750−800
+576%
|
110−120
−576%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 750−800
+576%
|
110−120
−576%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 1000−1050
+599%
|
140−150
−599%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1350−1400
+596%
|
190−200
−596%
|
| Hitman 3 | 800−850
+602%
|
110−120
−602%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1750−1800
+603%
|
240−250
−603%
|
| Metro Exodus | 550−600
+614%
|
77
−614%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 850−900
+614%
|
110−120
−614%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 1950−2000
+617%
|
272
−617%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 1900−1950
+604%
|
270
−604%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 850−900
+585%
|
120−130
−585%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 650−700
+577%
|
95−100
−577%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 700−750
+580%
|
100−110
−580%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 750−800
+576%
|
110−120
−576%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 750−800
+576%
|
110−120
−576%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 1350−1400
+596%
|
190−200
−596%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1650−1700
+617%
|
230
−617%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 1650−1700
+602%
|
235
−602%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 900−950
+582%
|
132
−582%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 850−900
+585%
|
120−130
−585%
|
Full HD
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 850−900
+614%
|
110−120
−614%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 900−950
+598%
|
120−130
−598%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 950−1000
+604%
|
130−140
−604%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 450−500
+562%
|
65−70
−562%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 500−550
+604%
|
70−75
−604%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 650−700
+591%
|
90−95
−591%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 900−950
+609%
|
127
−609%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 950−1000
+604%
|
130−140
−604%
|
| Hitman 3 | 600−650
+614%
|
80−85
−614%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1200−1250
+594%
|
173
−594%
|
| Metro Exodus | 850−900
+614%
|
119
−614%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 1050−1100
+586%
|
153
−586%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 650−700
+577%
|
96
−577%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 400−450
+545%
|
60−65
−545%
|
1440p
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 700−750
+593%
|
100−110
−593%
|
4K
High Preset
| Battlefield 5 | 450−500
+572%
|
65−70
−572%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 400−450
+614%
|
55−60
−614%
|
| Hitman 3 | 350−400
+600%
|
50−55
−600%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 600−650
+598%
|
85−90
−598%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 400−450
+578%
|
59
−578%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 550−600
+596%
|
79
−596%
|
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 300−310
+552%
|
45−50
−552%
|
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 300−310
+598%
|
40−45
−598%
|
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 300−310
+614%
|
40−45
−614%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 280−290
+600%
|
40−45
−600%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 650−700
+607%
|
90−95
−607%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 650−700
+584%
|
95
−584%
|
| Metro Exodus | 450−500
+572%
|
67
−572%
|
| Watch Dogs: Legion | 250−260
+614%
|
35−40
−614%
|
4K
Epic Preset
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 400−450
+578%
|
55−60
−578%
|
This is how RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB and R7 260X compete in popular games:
- RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB is 690% faster in 1080p
- RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB is 667% faster in 1440p
- RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB is 671% faster in 4K
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 59.31 | 8.25 |
| Recency | 18 May 2023 | 8 October 2013 |
| Cost | $499 | $139 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 16 GB | 4 GB |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 165 Watt | 115 Watt |
The GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 16 GB 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.
Comparisons with similar GPUs
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
