Radeon Pro 555 vs R7 260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 260 with Radeon Pro 555, including specs and performance data.

R7 260
2013
2 GB GDDR5, 115 Watt
7.50

Pro 555 outperforms R7 260 by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking531513
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.74no data
Power efficiency5.417.45
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code nameBonairePolaris 21
Market segmentDesktopMobile workstation
Designreferenceno data
Release date17 December 2013 (11 years ago)5 June 2017 (7 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 cores768768
Core clock speedno data850 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHzno data
Number of transistors2,080 million3,000 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0040.80
Floating-point processing power1.536 TFLOPS1.306 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs4848

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x8
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slotno data
Supplementary power connectors1 x 6-pinNone

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 GB2 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit128 Bit
Memory clock speed1625 MHz1275 MHz
Memory bandwidth104 GB/s81.6 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+-

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync++
DDMA audio+no data

API compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 (12_0)
Shader Model6.36.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan-1.2.131

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
Pro 555 8.15
+8.7%

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
Pro 555 3140
+8.6%

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
+17.7%
Pro 555 3721

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 HD30−35
−13.3%
34
+13.3%
4K10−12
−20%
12
+20%

Cost per frame, $

1080p3.63no data
4K10.90no 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
+0%
20
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 32
+0%
32
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+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 42
+0%
42
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 55−60
+0%
55−60
+0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 26
+0%
26
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 10−12
+0%
10−12
+0%
Battlefield 5 26
+0%
26
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Far Cry 5 21
+0%
21
+0%
Far Cry New Dawn 21−24
+0%
21−24
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 50−55
+0%
50−55
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+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 21−24
+0%
21−24
+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 15
+0%
15
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 18
+0%
18
+0%
Hitman 3 16−18
+0%
16−18
+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 12−14
+0%
12−14
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 16−18
+0%
16−18
+0%
Metro Exodus 10−11
+0%
10−11
+0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 8−9
+0%
8−9
+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 30−33
+0%
30−33
+0%
Metro Exodus 6−7
+0%
6−7
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 5−6
+0%
5−6
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 4−5
+0%
4−5
+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 4−5
+0%
4−5
+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 Pro 555 compete in popular games:

  • Pro 555 is 13% faster in 1080p
  • Pro 555 is 20% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

  • there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 7.50 8.15
Recency 17 December 2013 5 June 2017
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 75 Watt

Pro 555 has a 8.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 53.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Radeon R7 260 and Radeon Pro 555.

Be aware that Radeon R7 260 is a desktop card while Radeon Pro 555 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
AMD Radeon Pro 555
Radeon Pro 555

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
3.7 88 votes

Rate Radeon Pro 555 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.