GeForce 315M vs Radeon R7 M260

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking1028not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.02no data
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)
GPU code nameTopazGT218
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date11 June 2014 (10 years ago)5 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 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 cores38416
Compute units6no data
Core clock speed940 MHz606 MHz
Boost clock speed980 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,550 million260 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data14 Watt
Texture fill rate23.524.848
Floating-point processing power0.7526 TFLOPS0.03878 TFLOPS
Gigaflopsno data73
ROPs84
TMUs248

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCIe 3.0 x8PCI-E 2.0
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectorsNoneno 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 typeDDR3GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GBUp to 512 MB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHzUp to 800 (DDR3), Up to 800 (GDDR3) MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s12.8 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 ConnectorsNo outputsDisplayPortHDMIVGADual Link DVISingle Link DVI
Multi monitor supportno data+
HDMI-+
Maximum VGA resolutionno data2048x1536

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
HD3D+-
PowerTune+-
DualGraphics+-
ZeroCore+-
Switchable graphics+-
Power managementno data8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1211.1 (10_1)
Shader Model6.34.1
OpenGL4.34.1
OpenCL2.01.1
Vulkan-N/A
Mantle+-
CUDA-+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Non-gaming benchmark results comparison. The combined score is measured on a 0-100 point scale.



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 M260 502
+337%
GeForce 315M 115

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

R7 M260 5425
+389%
GeForce 315M 1109

Pros & cons summary


Recency 11 June 2014 5 January 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm

R7 M260 has an age advantage of 3 years, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 M260 and GeForce 315M. We've got no test results to judge.


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 M260
Radeon R7 M260
NVIDIA GeForce 315M
GeForce 315M

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.


3.1 224 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M260 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 157 votes

Rate GeForce 315M 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.