Radeon R7 250E vs R7 260X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 260X and Radeon R7 250E, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 260X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 115 Watt
8.27
+89.7%

R7 260X outperforms R7 250E by an impressive 90% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking502665
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.391.13
Power efficiency4.985.49
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)
GPU code nameBonaireCape Verde
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)20 December 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$139 $109

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 260X has 200% better value for money than R7 250E.

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 cores896512
Core clock speedno data800 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,080 million1,500 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt55 Watt
Texture fill rate61.6025.60
Floating-point processing power1.971 TFLOPS0.8192 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs5632

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length170 mm168 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
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 GB1 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1125 MHz
Memory bandwidth104 GB/s72 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 DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
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_1)
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan-1.2.131

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
+89.7%
R7 250E 4.36

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
+122%
R7 250E 1970

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.27 4.36
Recency 8 October 2013 20 December 2013
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 1 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 55 Watt

R7 260X has a 89.7% higher aggregate performance score, and a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount.

R7 250E, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 months, and 109.1% lower power consumption.

The Radeon R7 260X is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 250E in performance tests.


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
AMD Radeon R7 250E
Radeon R7 250E

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.


3.8 389 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 23 votes

Rate Radeon R7 250E 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.