Quadro M1000M vs Radeon R7 260

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 260 with Quadro M1000M, including specs and performance data.

R7 260
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 115 Watt
7.52
+1.6%

R7 260 outperforms M1000M by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking532536
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.714.17
Power efficiency5.4512.74
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Maxwell (2014−2017)
GPU code nameBonaireGM107
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date17 December 2013 (11 years ago)18 August 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 $200.89

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

M1000M has 12% better value for money than R7 260.

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 cores768512
Core clock speedno data993 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1072 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million1,870 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt40 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0031.78
Floating-point processing power1.536 TFLOPS1.017 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4832

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).

Laptop sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-A (3.0)
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinNone

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 amount2 GB2 GB/4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz1253 MHz
Memory bandwidth104 GB/s80 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data
Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan-+
CUDA-5.0

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.

R7 260 7.52
+1.6%
M1000M 7.40

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.

R7 260 2891
+1.7%
M1000M 2844

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.

R7 260 4380
+25.2%
M1000M 3498

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 HD35−40
−11.4%
39
+11.4%
4K16−18
+0%
16
+0%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.11
+65.4%
5.15
−65.4%
4K6.81
+84.3%
12.56
−84.3%
  • R7 260 has 65% lower cost per frame in 1080p
  • R7 260 has 84% lower cost per frame in 4K

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Elden Ring 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Elden Ring 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Fortnite 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Metro Exodus 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
World of Tanks 110−120
+0%
110−120
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Dota 2 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Valorant 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Elden Ring 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
World of Tanks 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Valorant 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Elden Ring 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Dota 2 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Fortnite 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Valorant 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

This is how R7 260 and M1000M compete in popular games:

  • M1000M is 11% faster in 1080p
  • A tie in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 63 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.52 7.40
Recency 17 December 2013 18 August 2015
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 40 Watt

R7 260 has a 1.6% higher aggregate performance score.

M1000M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 187.5% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R7 260 and Quadro M1000M.

Be aware that Radeon R7 260 is a desktop card while Quadro M1000M is a mobile workstation one.


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.


AMD Radeon R7 260
Radeon R7 260
NVIDIA Quadro M1000M
Quadro M1000M

Other comparisons

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.


3.5 50 votes

Rate Radeon R7 260 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 574 votes

Rate Quadro M1000M 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.