Radeon R7 M260 vs Quadro K620

Place in the ranking	590	1025
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	2.37	0.02
Power efficiency	8.90	no data
Architecture	Maxwell (2014−2017)	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)
GPU code name	GM107	Topaz
Market segment	Workstation	Laptop
Release date	22 July 2014 (10 years ago)	11 June 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$189.89	$799

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

Quadro K620 has 11750% better value for money than R7 M260.

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	384	384
Compute units	no data	6
Core clock speed	1058 MHz	940 MHz
Boost clock speed	1124 MHz	980 MHz
Number of transistors	1,870 million	1,550 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	41 Watt	no data
Texture fill rate	26.98	23.52
Floating-point processing power	0.8632 TFLOPS	0.7526 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	8
TMUs	24	24

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 size	no data	medium sized
Bus support	no data	PCIe 3.0 x8
Interface	PCIe 2.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x8
Length	160 mm	no data
Width	1" (2.5 cm)	no data
Supplementary power connectors	None	None

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	128 Bit	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	4 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	128 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	Up to 29 GB/s	14.4 GB/s
Shared memory	no data	-

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	1x DVI, 1x DisplayPort	No outputs
Number of simultaneous displays	4	no data

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	-	+
3D Vision Pro	+	no data
Mosaic	+	no data
nView Desktop Management	+	no data

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12	DirectX® 12
Shader Model	5.1	6.3
OpenGL	4.5	4.3
OpenCL	1.2	2.0
Vulkan	1.1.126	-
Mantle	-	+
CUDA	5.0	-

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.

Quadro K620 5.78
+345%

R7 M260 1.30

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.

Quadro K620 2231
+346%

R7 M260 500

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

55−60
+323%

−323%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

3.45

61.46

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 +0%	3−4 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 +0%	10−12 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 +0%	8−9 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3 +0%	3 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 +0%	30−35 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

+0%

2−3

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	0−1
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%