Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile vs Radeon R7 260X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 260X with Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile, including specs and performance data.

R7 260X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 115 Watt
8.27

RTX 3000 Mobile outperforms R7 260X by a whopping 217% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking504208
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.39no data
Power efficiency4.9822.69
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameBonaireTU106
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)27 May 2019 (5 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 cores8962304
Core clock speedno data945 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1380 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million10,800 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt80 Watt
Texture fill rate61.60198.7
Floating-point processing power1.971 TFLOPS6.359 TFLOPS
ROPs1664
TMUs56144
Tensor Coresno data288
Ray Tracing Coresno data36

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno 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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB6 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth104 GB/s448.0 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+-
HDMI+-
G-SYNC support-+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data
VR Readyno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan-1.2.131
CUDA-7.5

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 8.27
RTX 3000 Mobile 26.22
+217%

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 3190
RTX 3000 Mobile 10116
+217%

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
RTX 3000 Mobile 14842
+239%

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 HD27−30
−248%
94
+248%
4K27−30
−226%
88
+226%

Cost per frame, $

1080p5.15no data
4K5.15no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 77
+0%
77
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Battlefield 5 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Metro Exodus 90−95
+0%
90−95
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 39
+0%
39
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%
Far Cry 5 60−65
+0%
60−65
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 120−130
+0%
120−130
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 85−90
+0%
85−90
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 56
+0%
56
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 100−110
+0%
100−110
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 65−70
+0%
65−70
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 150−160
+0%
150−160
+0%
Hitman 3 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Metro Exodus 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 140−150
+0%
140−150
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 40−45
+0%
40−45
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Hitman 3 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 130−140
+0%
130−140
+0%
Metro Exodus 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry 5 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 35−40
+0%
35−40
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

This is how R7 260X and RTX 3000 Mobile compete in popular games:

  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 248% faster in 1080p
  • RTX 3000 Mobile is 226% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.27 26.22
Recency 8 October 2013 27 May 2019
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 6 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 80 Watt

RTX 3000 Mobile has a 217% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 5 years, a 50% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 43.8% lower power consumption.

The Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 260X in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 260X is a desktop card while Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile 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 RTX 3000 Mobile
Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile

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.


3.8 391 vote

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 275 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 3000 Mobile 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.