Radeon RX 590 vs R7 260

Place in the ranking	525	227
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	3.52	25.47
Power efficiency	5.46	9.63
Architecture	GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)	GCN 4.0 (2016−2020)
GPU code name	Bonaire	Polaris 30
Market segment	Desktop	Desktop
Design	reference	no data
Release date	17 December 2013 (10 years ago)	15 November 2018 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$109	$279

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

RX 590 has 624% better value for money than R7 260.

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	768	2304
Core clock speed	no data	1469 MHz
Boost clock speed	1100 MHz	1545 MHz
Number of transistors	2,080 million	5,700 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	115 Watt	175 Watt
Texture fill rate	48.00	222.5
Floating-point processing power	1.536 TFLOPS	7.119 TFLOPS
ROPs	16	32
TMUs	48	144

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 support	PCIe 3.0	no data
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x16	PCIe 3.0 x16
Length	170 mm	241 mm
Width	2-slot	2-slot
Supplementary power connectors	1 x 6-pin	1x 8-pin

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	GDDR5
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Memory bus width	128 Bit	256 Bit
Memory clock speed	1625 MHz	2000 MHz
Memory bandwidth	104 GB/s	256.0 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	1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort	1x HDMI, 3x DisplayPort
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.

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 (12_0)
Shader Model	6.3	6.4
OpenGL	4.6	4.6
OpenCL	2.0	2.0
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 7.49

RX 590 24.33
+225%

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

RX 590 9390
+225%

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

RX 590 16814
+284%

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	30−35 −227%	98 +227%
1440p	16−18 −250%	56 +250%
4K	10−12 −270%	37 +270%

Cost per frame, $

1080p	3.63	2.85
1440p	6.81	4.98
4K	10.90	7.54

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

40−45

+0%

40−45

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	65 +0%	65 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	86 +0%	86 +0%
Battlefield 5	136 +0%	136 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	69 +0%	69 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Far Cry 5	90 +0%	90 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	90 +0%	90 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	274 +0%	274 +0%
Hitman 3	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	301 +0%	301 +0%
Metro Exodus	124 +0%	124 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	91 +0%	91 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	140 +0%	140 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	272 +0%	272 +0%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	113 +0%	113 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	73 +0%	73 +0%
Battlefield 5	122 +0%	122 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	64 +0%	64 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Far Cry 5	74 +0%	74 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	71 +0%	71 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	259 +0%	259 +0%
Hitman 3	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	287 +0%	287 +0%
Metro Exodus	97 +0%	97 +0%
Red Dead Redemption 2	74 +0%	74 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	114 +0%	114 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	50−55 +0%	50−55 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	261 +0%	261 +0%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	39 +0%	39 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	62 +0%	62 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	46 +0%	46 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	40−45 +0%	40−45 +0%
Far Cry 5	55 +0%	55 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	91 +0%	91 +0%
Hitman 3	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	96 +0%	96 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	100 +0%	100 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	51 +0%	51 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	35 +0%	35 +0%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	45−50 +0%	45−50 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	35−40 +0%	35−40 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	24−27 +0%	24−27 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	55 +0%	55 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	38 +0%	38 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	14−16 +0%	14−16 +0%
Far Cry 5	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	130−140 +0%	130−140 +0%
Hitman 3	27−30 +0%	27−30 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	72 +0%	72 +0%
Metro Exodus	58 +0%	58 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	70 +0%	70 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	30−33 +0%	30−33 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	203 +0%	203 +0%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5	39 +0%	39 +0%
Far Cry New Dawn	26 +0%	26 +0%
Hitman 3	18−20 +0%	18−20 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	57 +0%	57 +0%
Metro Exodus	36 +0%	36 +0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	32 +0%	32 +0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	19 +0%	19 +0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla	42 +0%	42 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	20 +0%	20 +0%
Cyberpunk 2077	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Far Cry 5	17 +0%	17 +0%
Forza Horizon 4	46 +0%	46 +0%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	40 +0%	40 +0%
Watch Dogs: Legion	13 +0%	13 +0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

+0%

This is how R7 260 and RX 590 compete in popular games:

RX 590 is 227% faster in 1080p
RX 590 is 250% faster in 1440p
RX 590 is 270% faster in 4K

All in all, in popular games:

there's a draw in 72 tests (100%)

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	7.49	24.33
Recency	17 December 2013	15 November 2018
Maximum RAM amount	2 GB	8 GB
Chip lithography	28 nm	12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	115 Watt	175 Watt

R7 260 has 52.2% lower power consumption.

RX 590, on the other hand, has a 224.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 300% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon RX 590 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 260 in performance tests.

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