Radeon Vega 7 vs GeForce GTX 260

Place in the ranking	744	526
Place by popularity	not in top-100	39
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.14	no data
Power efficiency	1.20	11.48
Architecture	Tesla 2.0 (2007−2013)	GCN 5.1 (2018−2022)
GPU code name	GT200	Cezanne
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Release date	16 June 2008 (16 years ago)	13 April 2021 (3 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$449	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 cores	192	448
Core clock speed	576 MHz	300 MHz
Boost clock speed	no data	1900 MHz
Number of transistors	1,400 million	9,800 million
Manufacturing process technology	65 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	45 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature	105 °C	no data
Texture fill rate	36.86	53.20
Floating-point processing power	0.4769 TFLOPS	1.702 TFLOPS
ROPs	28	8
TMUs	64	28

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).

Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	IGP
Length	267 mm	no data
Height	4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)	no data
Width	2-slot	IGP
Supplementary power connectors	2x 6-pin	None
SLI options	+	-

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 type	GDDR3	System Shared
Maximum RAM amount	896 MB	System Shared
Memory bus width	448 Bit	System Shared
Memory clock speed	999 MHz	System Shared
Memory bandwidth	111.9 GB/s	no data
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	Dual Link DVIHDTV	No outputs
Multi monitor support	+	no data
HDMI	+	-
Maximum VGA resolution	2048x1536	no data
Audio input for HDMI	S/PDIF	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	11.1 (10_0)	12 (12_1)
Shader Model	4.0	6.4
OpenGL	2.1	4.6
OpenCL	1.1	2.1
Vulkan	N/A	1.2
CUDA	+	-

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	9−10 −156%	23 +156%
1440p	14−16 −157%	36 +157%
4K	8−9 −150%	20 +150%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	49.89	no data
1440p	32.07	no data
4K	56.13	no data

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	3.16	7.46
Recency	16 June 2008	13 April 2021
Chip lithography	65 nm	7 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	182 Watt	45 Watt

Vega 7 has a 136.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 12 years, a 828.6% more advanced lithography process, and 304.4% lower power consumption.

The Radeon Vega 7 is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.