Radeon HD 5670 vs R7 M260
Aggregated performance score
HD 5670 outperforms R7 M260 by 62% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.
| Place in performance ranking | 993 | 828 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 0.04 | 0.10 |
| Architecture | GCN (2011−2017) | Terascale 2 (2009−2015) |
| GPU code name | Opal Pro / Mars | Redwood |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Release date | 7 January 2014 (10 years old) | 14 January 2010 (14 years old) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $799 | $119 |
| Current price | $430 (0.5x MSRP) | $132 (1.1x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.
ATI HD 5670 has 150% better value for money than R7 M260.
Technical specs
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 | 400 |
| Compute units | 6 | no data |
| Core clock speed | 715 MHz | 775 MHz |
| Boost clock speed | 980 MHz | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,550 million | 627 million |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | no data | 64 Watt |
| Texture fill rate | 23.52 | 15.50 |
| Floating-point performance | 721.9 gflops | 620.0 gflops |
Size and compatibility
Information on Radeon R7 M260 and Radeon HD 5670 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 2.0 x16 |
| Length | no data | 168 mm |
| Width | no data | 1-slot |
| Supplementary power connectors | None | None |
Memory
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 type | DDR3 | GDDR5 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Memory bus width | 128 Bit | 128 Bit |
| Memory clock speed | 900 MHz | 1000 MHz |
| Memory bandwidth | 14.4 GB/s | 64 GB/s |
| Shared memory | - | no data |
Video outputs and ports
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 DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x VGA |
| HDMI | no data | + |
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 support
List of supported graphics and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | 11.2 (11_0) |
| Shader Model | 6.3 | 5.0 |
| OpenGL | 4.3 | 4.4 |
| OpenCL | 2.0 | 1.2 |
| Vulkan | no data | N/A |
| Mantle | + | no data |
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.
HD 5670 outperforms R7 M260 by 62% 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%
HD 5670 outperforms R7 M260 by 61% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
HD 5670 outperforms R7 M260 by 21% in 3DMark Vantage Performance.
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 outperforms HD 5670 by 29% in 3DMark 11 Performance 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:
| 900p | 16−18
−62.5%
| 26
+62.5%
|
| Full HD | 13
−146%
| 32
+146%
|
FPS performance in popular games
Full HD
Low Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Full HD
Medium Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 9−10
−22.2%
|
10−12
+22.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| Hitman 3 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
Full HD
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 9−10
−22.2%
|
10−12
+22.2%
|
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| Hitman 3 | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 1−2
−200%
|
3−4
+200%
|
| Metro Exodus | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 3−4
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 7−8
−14.3%
|
8−9
+14.3%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 4
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
Full HD
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Forza Horizon 4 | 0−1 | 4−5 |
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 3
−66.7%
|
5−6
+66.7%
|
1440p
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 3−4
−33.3%
|
4−5
+33.3%
|
| Hitman 3 | 4−5
−25%
|
5−6
+25%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 8−9
−12.5%
|
9−10
+12.5%
|
| Shadow of the Tomb Raider | 5−6
−20%
|
6−7
+20%
|
1440p
Ultra Preset
| Cyberpunk 2077 | 1−2
+0%
|
1−2
+0%
|
| Far Cry 5 | 2−3
−50%
|
3−4
+50%
|
| The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
4K
High Preset
| Call of Duty: Modern Warfare | 2−3
+0%
|
2−3
+0%
|
| Hitman 3 | 1−2
−100%
|
2−3
+100%
|
| Horizon Zero Dawn | 7−8
+0%
|
7−8
+0%
|
| Red Dead Redemption 2 | 0−1 | 1−2 |
4K
Ultra Preset
| Assassin's Creed Odyssey | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Assassin's Creed Valhalla | 0−1 | 1−2 |
| Far Cry 5 | 3−4
+0%
|
3−4
+0%
|
| Far Cry New Dawn | 5−6
+0%
|
5−6
+0%
|
This is how R7 M260 and ATI HD 5670 compete in popular games:
- ATI HD 5670 is 62.5% faster than R7 M260 in 900p
- ATI HD 5670 is 146% faster than R7 M260 in 1080p
Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:
- in Hitman 3, with 1080p resolution and the Medium Preset, the ATI HD 5670 is 200% faster than the R7 M260.
All in all, in popular games:
- ATI HD 5670 is ahead in 23 tests (79%)
- there's a draw in 6 tests (21%)
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 1.28 | 2.07 |
| Recency | 7 January 2014 | 14 January 2010 |
| Cost | $799 | $119 |
| Maximum RAM amount | 4 GB | 1 GB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 40 nm |
The Radeon HD 5670 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M260 in performance tests.
Be aware that Radeon R7 M260 is a notebook card while Radeon HD 5670 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar GPU comparisons
We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.
