R6 M255DX vs R7 M260

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

R7 M260
1.28

R6 M255DX outperforms R7 M260 by 22% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

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

Place in performance ranking992917
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Value for money0.04no data
ArchitectureGCN (2011−2017)GCN (2011−2017)
GPU code nameOpal Pro / MarsJet UL(T) DDR3
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date7 January 2014 (10 years old)4 June 2014 (9 years old)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 no data
Current price$430 (0.5x MSRP)no data
Value for money

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Technical specs

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 cores384576
Compute units6no data
Core clock speed715 MHz855 / 514 MHz
Boost clock speed980 MHz940 MHz
Number of transistors1,550 million690 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Texture fill rate23.5217.10
Floating-point performance721.9 gflopsno data

Size and compatibility

Information on Radeon R7 M260 and Radeon R6 M255DX compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop sizemedium sizedmedium sized
Bus supportPCIe 3.0 x8no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8IGP
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno data

Memory

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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed900 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/sno data
Shared memory-+

Video outputs and ports

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 ConnectorsNo outputsNo outputs
Eyefinityno data+

Technologies

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

AppAcceleration-+
Enduro-no data
FreeSync1no data
HD3D+no data
PowerTune+no data
DualGraphics1no data
TrueAudio-no data
ZeroCore+no data
Switchable graphics1no data

API support

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_1)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.34.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkanno data1.2.131
Mantle+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.

R7 M260 1.28
R6 M255DX 1.56
+21.9%

R6 M255DX outperforms R7 M260 by 22% in our combined 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%

R7 M260 496
R6 M255DX 605
+22%

R6 M255DX outperforms R7 M260 by 22% in Passmark.

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R7 M260 5425
+8.3%
R6 M255DX 5008

R7 M260 outperforms R6 M255DX by 8% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R7 M260 1897
R6 M255DX 2198
+15.9%

R6 M255DX outperforms R7 M260 by 16% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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%

R7 M260 1067
R6 M255DX 1115
+4.5%

R6 M255DX outperforms R7 M260 by 4% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R7 M260 5603
R6 M255DX 7172
+28%

R6 M255DX outperforms R7 M260 by 28% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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 HD13
+18.2%
11
−18.2%

Performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 9−10
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Hitman 3 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Metro Exodus 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
+0%
4−5
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
−33.3%
4−5
+33.3%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 0−1 0−1
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how R7 M260 and R6 M255DX compete in popular games:

1080p resolution:

  • R7 M260 is 18.2% faster than R6 M255DX

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Forza Horizon 4, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the R6 M255DX is 100% faster than the R7 M260.

All in all, in popular games:

  • R6 M255DX is ahead in 15 tests (47%)
  • there's a draw in 17 tests (53%)

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.28 1.56
Recency 7 January 2014 4 June 2014
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB System Shared

The Radeon R6 M255DX is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M260 in performance tests.


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

User ratings

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon R7 M260
Radeon R7 M260
AMD Radeon R6 M255DX
Radeon R6 M255DX

Similar GPU comparisons

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

User ratings: view and submit

Here you can see the user rating of the graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3 194 votes

Rate AMD Radeon R7 M260 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 16 votes

Rate AMD Radeon R6 M255DX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.