GeForce GTX 1630 vs Radeon R7 260X

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 260X and GeForce GTX 1630, covering specs and all relevant benchmarks.

R7 260X
2013
4 GB GDDR5, 115 Watt
8.28

GTX 1630 outperforms R7 260X by an impressive 56% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking507390
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.58no data
Power efficiency4.9411.83
ArchitectureGCN 2.0 (2013−2017)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameBonaireTU117
Market segmentDesktopDesktop
Designreferenceno data
Release date8 October 2013 (11 years ago)28 June 2022 (2 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$139 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 cores896512
Core clock speedno data1740 MHz
Boost clock speed1000 MHz1785 MHz
Number of transistors2,080 million4,700 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)115 Watt75 Watt
Texture fill rate61.6057.12
Floating-point processing power1.971 TFLOPS1.828 TFLOPS
ROPs1616
TMUs5632

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 x16PCIe 3.0 x16
Length170 mm145 mm
Width2-slot1-slot
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 typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB4 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit64 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1500 MHz
Memory bandwidth104 GB/s96 GB/s

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 Connectors2x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x DisplayPort1x DVI, 1x HDMI 2.0, 1x DisplayPort 1.4a
Eyefinity+-
HDMI++

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 Model6.36.8
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL2.03.0
Vulkan-1.3
CUDA-7.5

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 260X 8.28
GTX 1630 12.94
+56.3%

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 260X 3189
GTX 1630 4987
+56.4%

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 8.28 12.94
Recency 8 October 2013 28 June 2022
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 115 Watt 75 Watt

GTX 1630 has a 56.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 53.3% lower power consumption.

The GeForce GTX 1630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 260X in performance tests.


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 260X
Radeon R7 260X
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1630
GeForce GTX 1630

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.


3.8 393 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 1272 votes

Rate GeForce GTX 1630 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.