Radeon R7 260X vs GeForce GTX 480

Aggregate performance score

We've compared GeForce GTX 480 and Radeon R7 260X, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

GTX 480
2010
1536 MB GDDR5, 250 Watt
10.64
+28.7%

GTX 480 outperforms R7 260X by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking431504
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.643.56
Power efficiency2.975.01
ArchitectureFermi (2010−2014)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameGF100Bonaire
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date26 March 2010 (14 years ago)8 October 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499 $139

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

R7 260X has 117% better value for money than GTX 480.

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 cores480896
Core clock speed700 MHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1000 MHz
Number of transistors3,100 million2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology40 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)250 Watt115 Watt
Maximum GPU temperature105 °Cno data
Texture fill rate42.0661.60
Floating-point processing power1.345 TFLOPS1.971 TFLOPS
ROPs4816
TMUs6056

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).

Bus support16x PCI-E 2.0PCIe 3.0
InterfacePCIe 2.0 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length267 mm170 mm
Height4.376" (111 mm) (11.1 cm)no data
Width2-slot2-slot
Supplementary power connectors1x 6-pin + 1x 8-pin1 x 6-pin
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 typeGDDR5GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount1536 MB4 GB
Memory bus width384 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1848 MHz (3696 data rate)no data
Memory bandwidth177.4 GB/s104 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 ConnectorsTwo Dual Link DVI, Mini HDMI2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort
Multi monitor support+no data
Eyefinity-+
HDMI++
HDCP+-
Maximum VGA resolution2048x1536no data
Audio input for HDMIInternalno data

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync-+
DDMA audiono data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12 (11_0)DirectX® 12
Shader Model5.16.3
OpenGL4.24.6
OpenCL1.12.0
VulkanN/A-
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.

GTX 480 10.64
+28.7%
R7 260X 8.27

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.

GTX 480 4106
+28.8%
R7 260X 3189

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.

GTX 480 3650
R7 260X 4380
+20%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+29.1%
55−60
−29.1%
Hitman 3 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+28.9%
45−50
−28.9%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+30%
50−55
−30%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Battlefield 5 30−35
+37.5%
24−27
−37.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+29.1%
55−60
−29.1%
Hitman 3 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+28.9%
45−50
−28.9%
Metro Exodus 30−35
+41.7%
24−27
−41.7%
Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+30%
50−55
−30%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Far Cry 5 24−27
+38.9%
18−20
−38.9%
Forza Horizon 4 70−75
+29.1%
55−60
−29.1%
Hitman 3 20−22
+42.9%
14−16
−42.9%
Horizon Zero Dawn 55−60
+28.9%
45−50
−28.9%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 35−40
+29.6%
27−30
−29.6%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 27−30
+33.3%
21−24
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+30%
50−55
−30%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 30−33
+42.9%
21−24
−42.9%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 21−24
+31.3%
16−18
−31.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 10−12
+37.5%
8−9
−37.5%
Cyberpunk 2077 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Far Cry 5 12−14
+33.3%
9−10
−33.3%
Forza Horizon 4 45−50
+40%
35−40
−40%
Hitman 3 14−16
+40%
10−11
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
+37.5%
16−18
−37.5%
Metro Exodus 16−18
+33.3%
12−14
−33.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 14−16
+50%
10−11
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Watch Dogs: Legion 65−70
+34%
50−55
−34%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 18−20
+50%
12−14
−50%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Hitman 3 7−8
+40%
5−6
−40%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+34.3%
35−40
−34.3%
Metro Exodus 9−10
+50%
6−7
−50%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 5−6
+66.7%
3−4
−66.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2 0−1
Far Cry 5 6−7
+50%
4−5
−50%
Forza Horizon 4 12−14
+30%
10−11
−30%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+33.3%
6−7
−33.3%
Watch Dogs: Legion 4−5
+33.3%
3−4
−33.3%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−11
+42.9%
7−8
−42.9%

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 10.64 8.27
Recency 26 March 2010 8 October 2013
Maximum RAM amount 1536 MB 4 GB
Chip lithography 40 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 250 Watt 115 Watt

GTX 480 has a 28.7% higher aggregate performance score.

R7 260X, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 166.7% higher maximum VRAM amount, a 42.9% more advanced lithography process, and 117.4% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 480 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 260X in performance tests.


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.


NVIDIA GeForce GTX 480
GeForce GTX 480
AMD Radeon R7 260X
Radeon R7 260X

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.


3.3 211 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 480 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 392 votes

Rate Radeon R7 260X 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.