GeForce GTX 760M vs Radeon R7 260X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 260X with GeForce GTX 760M, including specs and performance data.

R7 260X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 115 Watt
8.28
+85.7%

R7 260X outperforms GTX 760M by an impressive 86% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking507664
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.58no data
Power efficiency4.945.56
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameBonaireGK106
Market segmentDesktopLaptop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)30 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$139 no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

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 cores896768
Core clock speedno data657 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz657 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million2,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate61.6042.05
Floating-point processing power1.971 TFLOPS1.009 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs5664

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 3.0PCI Express 3.0, PCI Express 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno data
SLI options-+

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 amount4 GB2 GB
Standard memory configurationno dataGDDR5
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth104 GB/s64.0 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
eDP 1.2 signal supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
LVDS signal supportno dataUp to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display supportno dataUp to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) supportno dataUp to 3840x2160
HDMI++
HDCP content protection-+
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI-+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming-+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data
Blu-Ray 3D Support-+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder-+
Optimus-+
3D Vision / 3DTV Play-+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 API
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan-1.1.126
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.

R7 260X 8.28
+85.7%
GTX 760M 4.46

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 260X 3189
+85.4%
GTX 760M 1720

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 260X 4380
+92.9%
GTX 760M 2271

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:

900p75−80
+82.9%
41
−82.9%
Full HD80−85
+81.8%
44
−81.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p1.74no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Battlefield 5 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Hitman 3 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Hitman 3 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Hitman 3 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Metro Exodus 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 0−1 0−1

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

This is how R7 260X and GTX 760M compete in popular games:

  • R7 260X is 83% faster in 900p
  • R7 260X is 82% faster in 1080p

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 67 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.28 4.46
Recency 8 October 2013 30 May 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 55 Watt

R7 260X has a 85.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, and a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount.

GTX 760M, on the other hand, has 109.1% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 260X is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 760M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 260X is a desktop card while GeForce GTX 760M is a notebook 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 260X
Radeon R7 260X
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760M
GeForce GTX 760M

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.


3.8 393 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 100 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 760M 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.