GeForce GTX 260 vs Radeon R5 Graphics
Primary details
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | 712 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.36 |
| Architecture | GCN 2.0 (2013−2017) | Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013) |
| GPU code name | Spectre SL | GT200 |
| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |
| Release date | 17 September 2014 (9 years ago) | 16 June 2008 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $449 |
| Current price | $213 | $49 (0.1x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
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 | 256 | 192 |
| CUDA cores | no data | 192 |
| Core clock speed | 497 MHz | 576 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 720 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,410 million | 1,400 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 182 Watt |
| Maximum GPU temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Texture fill rate | 7.952 | 36.9 billion/sec |
| Floating-point performance | 388.1 gflops | 476.9 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).
| Interface | IGP | PCIe 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 10.5" (267 mm) (26.7 cm) |
| Height | no data | 4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm) |
| Width | IGP | 2-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | no data | 2x 6-pin |
| SLI options | 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 | System Shared | GDDR3 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 896 MB |
| Memory bus width | System Shared | 448 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | System Shared | 999 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | no data | 111.9 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 Connectors | No outputs | Dual Link DVIHDTV |
| Multi monitor support | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| Maximum VGA resolution | no data | 2048x1536 |
| Audio input for HDMI | no data | S/PDIF |
API compatibility
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | 12 (12_0) | 11.1 (10_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.0 | 4.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | 2.1 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.1 |
| Vulkan | 1.2.131 | N/A |
| CUDA | no data | + |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 17 September 2014 | 16 June 2008 |
| Maximum RAM amount | System Shared | 896 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 182 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Radeon R5 Graphics and GeForce GTX 260. We've got no test results to judge.
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.
