GeForce RTX 3090 Ti vs Radeon R7 M260

Place in performance ranking	993	9
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.04	17.37
Architecture	GCN (2011−2017)	Ampere (2020−2022)
GPU code name	Opal Pro / Mars	Ampere GA102
Market segment	Laptop	Desktop
Release date	7 January 2014 (10 years ago)	27 January 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$799	$1,999
Current price	$430 (0.5x MSRP)	$1251 (0.6x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RTX 3090 Ti has 43325% better value for money than R7 M260.

Detailed specifications

General performance parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. These parameters indirectly speak of performance, but for precise assessment you have to consider their benchmark and gaming test results. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores	384	10752
Compute units	6	no data
Core clock speed	715 MHz	1560 MHz
Boost clock speed	980 MHz	1860 MHz
Number of transistors	1,550 million	28,300 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	8 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	450 Watt
Texture fill rate	23.52	625.0
Floating-point performance	721.9 gflops	no data

Form factor & compatibility

Information on Radeon R7 M260 and GeForce RTX 3090 Ti compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop video cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility). For notebook video cards it's notebook size, connection slot and bus, if the video card is inserted into a slot instead of being soldered to the notebook motherboard.

Laptop size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCIe 3.0 x8	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 4.0 x16
Length	no data	336 mm
Width	no data	3-slot
Supplementary power connectors	None	1x 16-pin

Memory type	DDR3	GDDR6X
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	24 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	384 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	21000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	1,008 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 Connectors	No outputs	1x HDMI 2.1, 3x DisplayPort 1.4a
HDMI	no data	+

Supported technologies

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

AppAcceleration	-	no data
Enduro	-	no data
FreeSync	1	no data
HD3D	+	no data
PowerTune	+	no data
DualGraphics	1	no data
TrueAudio	-	no data
ZeroCore	+	no data
Switchable graphics	1	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model	6.3	6.6
OpenGL	4.3	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	3.0
Vulkan	no data	1.3
Mantle	+	no data
CUDA	no data	8.6

Synthetic benchmark performance

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

Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance 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 1.28

RTX 3090 Ti 76.94
+5911%

GeForce RTX 3090 Ti outperforms Radeon R7 M260 by 5911% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Passmark

This is the most ubiquitous GPU benchmark, part of Passmark PerformanceTest suite. 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.

Benchmark coverage: 25%

R7 M260 496

RTX 3090 Ti 29781
+5904%

GeForce RTX 3090 Ti outperforms Radeon R7 M260 by 5904% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

R7 M260 1897

RTX 3090 Ti 69481
+3563%

GeForce RTX 3090 Ti outperforms Radeon R7 M260 by 3563% in 3DMark 11 Performance GPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R7 M260 1067

RTX 3090 Ti 53110
+4878%

GeForce RTX 3090 Ti outperforms Radeon R7 M260 by 4878% in 3DMark Fire Strike Graphics.

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

R7 M260 5603

RTX 3090 Ti 246319
+4296%

GeForce RTX 3090 Ti outperforms Radeon R7 M260 by 4296% in 3DMark Cloud Gate GPU.

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 HD	13 −1515%	210 +1515%
1440p	2−3 −6900%	140 +6900%
4K	1−2 −10000%	101 +10000%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

−5375%

219
+5375%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −1878%	170−180 +1878%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −4925%	201 +4925%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	210−220
Hitman 3	1−2 −21500%	210−220 +21500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −16800%	160−170 +16800%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −4267%	130−140 +4267%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −3686%	265 +3686%

Full HD
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	9−10 −1878%	170−180 +1878%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −4225%	173 +4225%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	210−220
Hitman 3	1−2 −21500%	210−220 +21500%
Horizon Zero Dawn	1−2 −16800%	160−170 +16800%
Metro Exodus	2−3 −8800%	178 +8800%
Red Dead Redemption 2	3−4 −4267%	130−140 +4267%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	7−8 −3486%	251 +3486%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	4 −9750%	394 +9750%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 −3700%	152 +3700%
Forza Horizon 4	0−1	210−220
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3 −6333%	193 +6333%

1440p
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	3−4 −4600%	140−150 +4600%
Hitman 3	4−5 −4300%	170−180 +4300%
Horizon Zero Dawn	8−9 −1575%	130−140 +1575%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	5−6 −3580%	184 +3580%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 −10300%	104 +10300%
Far Cry 5	2−3 −7300%	140−150 +7300%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	2−3 −7250%	140−150 +7250%

4K
High Preset

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	2−3 −4350%	85−90 +4350%
Hitman 3	1−2 −10400%	100−110 +10400%
Horizon Zero Dawn	7−8 −1200%	90−95 +1200%
Red Dead Redemption 2	0−1	50−55

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	0−1	60−65
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	0−1	73
Far Cry 5	3−4 −3067%	95−100 +3067%
Far Cry New Dawn	5−6 −1780%	90−95 +1780%