GeForce GTX 260M vs Radeon HD 7970M

Place in the ranking	478	1115
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Power efficiency	6.39	1.04
Architecture	GCN 1.0 (2011−2020)	Tesla (2006−2010)
GPU code name	Wimbledon	G92
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	24 April 2012 (12 years ago)	3 March 2009 (15 years ago)

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	1280	112
Core clock speed	850 MHz	550 MHz
Number of transistors	2,800 million	754 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	65 Watt
Texture fill rate	68.00	30.80
Floating-point processing power	2.176 TFLOPS	0.308 TFLOPS
Gigaflops	no data	462
ROPs	32	16
TMUs	80	56

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	large	large
Bus support	no data	PCI-E 2.0
Interface	MXM-B (3.0)	PCIe 2.0 x16
Supplementary power connectors	None	no data
SLI options	-	2-way
MXM Type	no data	MXM 3.0 Type-B

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	GDDR5	GDDR3
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Memory bus width	256 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1200 MHz	Up to 950 MHz
Memory bandwidth	153.6 GB/s	61 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	DisplayPortSingle Link DVIDual Link DVIVGALVDSHDMI
HDMI	-	+
Maximum VGA resolution	no data	2048x1536
Audio input for HDMI	no data	S/PDIF

Supported technologies

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

Power management

no data

8.0

API compatibility

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

DirectX	12 (11_1)	11.1 (10_0)
Shader Model	5.1	4.0
OpenGL	4.6	2.1
OpenCL	1.2	1.1
Vulkan	1.2.131	N/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.

HD 7970M 8.86
+843%

GTX 260M 0.94

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.

HD 7970M 3568
+841%

GTX 260M 379

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.

HD 7970M 21938
+348%

GTX 260M 4901

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	84 +950%	8−9 −950%
Full HD	61 +126%	27 −126%

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +375%	4−5 −375%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +900%	3−4 −900%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +375%	4−5 −375%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +363%	8−9 −363%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +1050%	2−3 −1050%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +1150%	2−3 −1150%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +317%	6−7 −317%
Valorant	35−40 +1067%	3−4 −1067%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +900%	3−4 −900%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +375%	4−5 −375%
Dota 2	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +290%	10−11 −290%
Fortnite	50−55 +1700%	3−4 −1700%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +363%	8−9 −363%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +1050%	2−3 −1050%
Grand Theft Auto V	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Metro Exodus	24−27 +1150%	2−3 −1150%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +500%	12−14 −500%
Red Dead Redemption 2	24−27 +317%	6−7 −317%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	27−30 +367%	6−7 −367%
Valorant	35−40 +1067%	3−4 −1067%
World of Tanks	121 +426%	21−24 −426%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	30−33 +900%	3−4 −900%
Counter-Strike 2	16−18 +129%	7−8 −129%
Cyberpunk 2077	18−20 +375%	4−5 −375%
Dota 2	30−35 +1000%	3−4 −1000%
Far Cry 5	35−40 +290%	10−11 −290%
Forza Horizon 4	35−40 +363%	8−9 −363%
Forza Horizon 5	21−24 +1050%	2−3 −1050%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	70−75 +500%	12−14 −500%
Valorant	35−40 +1067%	3−4 −1067%

1440p
High Preset

Dota 2	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Grand Theft Auto V	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	50−55 +960%	5−6 −960%
Red Dead Redemption 2	8−9	0−1
World of Tanks	65−70 +1240%	5−6 −1240%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	18−20 +1700%	1−2 −1700%
Cyberpunk 2077	7−8 +133%	3−4 −133%
Far Cry 5	20−22 +300%	5−6 −300%
Forza Horizon 4	20−22 +900%	2−3 −900%
Forza Horizon 5	14−16 +1300%	1−2 −1300%
Metro Exodus	16−18 +1600%	1−2 −1600%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	12−14 +200%	4−5 −200%
Valorant	21−24 +283%	6−7 −283%

4K
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Dota 2	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%
Grand Theft Auto V	18−20 +26.7%	14−16 −26.7%
Metro Exodus	5−6	0−1
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS	27−30 +800%	3−4 −800%
Red Dead Redemption 2	6−7	0−1
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	18−20 +26.7%	14−16 −26.7%

4K
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5	8−9 +700%	1−2 −700%
Counter-Strike 2	10−11 +0%	10−11 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	3−4 +50%	2−3 −50%
Dota 2	20−22 +33.3%	14−16 −33.3%
Far Cry 5	10−12	0−1
Fortnite	10−11 +900%	1−2 −900%
Forza Horizon 4	12−14 +1100%	1−2 −1100%
Forza Horizon 5	6−7	0−1
Valorant	9−10 +800%	1−2 −800%

This is how HD 7970M and GTX 260M compete in popular games:

HD 7970M is 950% faster in 900p
HD 7970M is 126% faster in 1080p

Here's the range of performance differences observed across popular games:

in Fortnite, with 1080p resolution and the High Preset, the HD 7970M is 1700% faster.

All in all, in popular games:

HD 7970M is ahead in 34 tests (94%)
there's a draw in 2 tests (6%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	8.86	0.94
Recency	24 April 2012	3 March 2009
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	1 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	100 Watt	65 Watt

HD 7970M has a 842.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

GTX 260M, on the other hand, has 53.8% lower power consumption.

The Radeon HD 7970M is our recommended choice as it beats the GeForce GTX 260M in performance tests.

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