Quadro 3000M X2 vs Radeon R7 260X

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking503not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.39no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameBonaireEXMF104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (10 years ago)22 February 2011 (13 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 cores896240
Core clock speedno data450 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,080 million1,950 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt150 Watt
Texture fill rate61.6018.00
Floating-point processing power1.971 TFLOPS0.432 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs5640

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (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 amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data625 MHz
Memory bandwidth104 GB/s80 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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortPortable Device Dependent
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (11_0)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan-N/A
CUDA-2.1

Pros & cons summary


Recency 8 October 2013 22 February 2011
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 150 Watt

R7 260X has an age advantage of 2 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 30.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 260X and Quadro 3000M X2. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Radeon R7 260X is a desktop card while Quadro 3000M X2 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 260X
Radeon R7 260X
NVIDIA Quadro 3000M X2
Quadro 3000M X2

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.


3.8 386 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Quadro 3000M X2 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.