Radeon Vega 3 Efficient vs R7 260

VS

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking525not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.52no data
Power efficiency5.46no data
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)GCN 5.0 (2017−2020)
GPU code nameBonaireRaven
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date17 December 2013 (10 years ago)26 May 2018 (6 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 cores768192
Core clock speedno data300 MHz
Boost clock speed1100 MHz1000 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million4,940 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm14 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt15 Watt
Texture fill rate48.0012.00
Floating-point processing power1.536 TFLOPS0.384 TFLOPS
ROPs164
TMUs4812

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 supportPCIe 3.0no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x16IGP
Length170 mmno data
Width2-slotIGP
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 typeGDDR5System Shared
Maximum RAM amount2 GBSystem Shared
Memory bus width128 BitSystem Shared
Memory clock speed1625 MHzSystem Shared
Memory bandwidth104 GB/sno 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 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_1)
Shader Model6.36.4
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan-1.2.131

Pros & cons summary


Recency 17 December 2013 26 May 2018
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 15 Watt

Vega 3 Efficient has an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 666.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Radeon R7 260 and Radeon Vega 3 Efficient. We've got no test results to judge.


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 Vega 3 Efficient
Radeon Vega 3 Efficient

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 44 votes

Rate Radeon Vega 3 Efficient 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.