GeForce GT 435M vs Radeon R7 M260

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 M260 and GeForce GT 435M, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 M260
2014
4 GB DDR3
1.31

GT 435M outperforms R7 M260 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking10321011
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Power efficiencyno data2.74
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Fermi (2010−2014)
GPU code nameTopazGF108
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Release date11 June 2014 (10 years ago)3 September 2010 (14 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 cores38496
Compute units6no data
Core clock speed940 MHz650 MHz
Boost clock speed980 MHzno data
Number of transistors1,550 million585 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm40 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data35 Watt
Texture fill rate23.5210.40
Floating-point processing power0.7526 TFLOPS0.2496 TFLOPS
ROPs84
TMUs2416

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 sizedlarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0 x8no data
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 typeDDR3DDR3
Maximum RAM amount4 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz800 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s25.6 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 outputsNo outputs

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+-

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 API with Feature Level 12.1
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.34.5
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.


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 M260 1.31
GT 435M 1.39
+6.1%

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 505
GT 435M 535
+5.9%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

R7 M260 1897
+137%
GT 435M 799

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
+40.2%
GT 435M 3870

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:

900p16−18
−18.8%
19
+18.8%
Full HD13
−84.6%
24
+84.6%

Cost per frame, $

1080p61.46no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Elden Ring 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Elden Ring 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Fortnite 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−100%
2−3
+100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
−75%
7−8
+75%
World of Tanks 27−30
−3.6%
27−30
+3.6%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Dota 2 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Far Cry 5 10−11
−10%
10−12
+10%
Forza Horizon 4 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 14−16
−7.1%
14−16
+7.1%

1440p
High Preset

PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
World of Tanks 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Counter-Strike 2 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Far Cry 5 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Valorant 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%

4K
High Preset

Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Elden Ring 0−1 0−1
Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 0−1 0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Dota 2 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry 5 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Valorant 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%

This is how R7 M260 and GT 435M compete in popular games:

  • GT 435M is 19% faster in 900p
  • GT 435M is 85% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

  • in Grand Theft Auto V, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the GT 435M is 100% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

  • GT 435M is ahead in 10 tests (23%)
  • there's a draw in 34 tests (77%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.31 1.39
Recency 11 June 2014 3 September 2010
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 2 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm

R7 M260 has an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 42.9% more advanced lithography process.

GT 435M, on the other hand, has a 6.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R7 M260 and GeForce GT 435M.


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 GT 435M
GeForce GT 435M

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 226 votes

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

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

Rate GeForce GT 435M 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.