Quadro K5100M vs Radeon R7 260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 260 with Quadro K5100M, including specs and performance data.

R7 260
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 115 Watt
7.50

K5100M outperforms R7 260 by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking531506
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.74no data
Power efficiency5.415.68
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Kepler (2012−2018)
GPU code nameBonaireGK104
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date17 December 2013 (11 years ago)23 July 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109 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 cores7681536
Core clock speedno data771 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,080 million3,540 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt100 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0098.69
Floating-point processing power1.536 TFLOPS2.369 TFLOPS
ROPs1632
TMUs48128

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 sizeno datalarge
Bus supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16MXM-B (3.0)
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinno data

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 amount2 GB8 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz900 MHz
Memory bandwidth104 GB/s115.2 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 Connectors1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPortNo outputs
Eyefinity+-
HDMI+-
DisplayPort support+-
Display Portno data1.2

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync+-
DDMA audio+no data
Optimus-+
3D Vision Prono data+
Mosaicno data+
nView Display Managementno data+
Optimusno data+

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212
Shader Model6.35.1
OpenGL4.64.5
OpenCL2.01.2
Vulkan-+
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.

R7 260 7.50
K5100M 8.28
+10.4%

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.

R7 260 2891
K5100M 3190
+10.3%

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.

R7 260 4380
K5100M 4793
+9.4%

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 HD45−50
−13.3%
51
+13.3%
4K21−24
−23.8%
26
+23.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p2.42no data
4K5.19no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Metro Exodus 24−27
+0%
24−27
+0%
Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 82
+0%
82
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 20−22
+0%
20−22
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 18−20
+0%
18−20
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hitman 3 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 45−50
+0%
45−50
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14
+0%
14
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Far Cry 5 9−10
+0%
9−10
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 30−35
+0%
30−35
+0%
Hitman 3 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14−16
+0%
14−16
+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 7−8
+0%
7−8
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
Hitman 3 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 27−30
+0%
27−30
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 10
+0%
10
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

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

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 8−9
+0%
8−9
+0%

This is how R7 260 and K5100M compete in popular games:

  • K5100M is 13% faster in 1080p
  • K5100M is 24% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.50 8.28
Recency 17 December 2013 23 July 2013
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 8 GB
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 100 Watt

R7 260 has an age advantage of 4 months.

K5100M, on the other hand, has a 10.4% higher aggregate performance score, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and 15% lower power consumption.

The Quadro K5100M is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 260 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 260 is a desktop card while Quadro K5100M is a mobile workstation one.


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.


AMD Radeon R7 260
Radeon R7 260
NVIDIA Quadro K5100M
Quadro K5100M

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.


3.5 50 votes

Rate Radeon R7 260 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 50 votes

Rate Quadro K5100M 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.