GeForce GT 735M vs Radeon R7 M260

Place in the ranking	1030	936
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.03	no data
Power efficiency	no data	3.55
Architecture	GCN 3.0 (2014−2019)	Kepler 2.0 (2013−2015)
GPU code name	Topaz	GK208
Market segment	Laptop	Laptop
Release date	11 June 2014 (10 years ago)	1 April 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$799	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 cores	384	384
Compute units	6	no data
Core clock speed	940 MHz	575 MHz
Boost clock speed	980 MHz	889 MHz
Number of transistors	1,550 million	915 million
Manufacturing process technology	28 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	no data	33 Watt
Texture fill rate	23.52	18.40
Floating-point processing power	0.7526 TFLOPS	0.4416 TFLOPS
ROPs	8	8
TMUs	24	32

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 size	medium sized	no data
Bus support	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCI Express 3.0
Interface	PCIe 3.0 x8	PCIe 3.0 x8
Supplementary power connectors	None	no 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 type	DDR3	DDR3
Maximum RAM amount	4 GB	2 GB
Standard memory configuration	no data	DDR3
Memory bus width	128 Bit	64 Bit
Memory clock speed	900 MHz	900 MHz
Memory bandwidth	14.4 GB/s	14.4 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	No outputs	No outputs
eDP 1.2 signal support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
LVDS signal support	no data	Up to 1920x1200
VGA аnalog display support	no data	Up to 2048x1536
DisplayPort Multimode (DP++) support	no data	Up to 3840x2160
HDMI	-	+
HDCP content protection	-	+
7.1 channel HD audio on HDMI	-	+
TrueHD and DTS-HD audio bitstreaming	-	+

Supported technologies

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

FreeSync	+	-
HD3D	+	-
PowerTune	+	-
DualGraphics	+	-
ZeroCore	+	-
Switchable graphics	+	-
Blu-Ray 3D Support	-	+
H.264, VC1, MPEG2 1080p video decoder	-	+
Optimus	-	+
3D Vision / 3DTV Play	-	+

API compatibility

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

DirectX	DirectX® 12	12 API
Shader Model	6.3	5.1
OpenGL	4.3	4.5
OpenCL	2.0	1.1
Vulkan	-	1.1.126
Mantle	+	-
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 M260 1.30

GT 735M 1.68
+29.2%

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 M260 502

GT 735M 650
+29.5%

3DMark 11 Performance GPU

3DMark 11 is an obsolete DirectX 11 benchmark by Futuremark. It used four tests based on two scenes, one being few submarines exploring the submerged wreck of a sunken ship, the other is an abandoned temple deep in the jungle. All the tests are heavy with volumetric lighting and tessellation, and despite being done in 1280x720 resolution, are relatively taxing. Discontinued in January 2020, 3DMark 11 is now superseded by Time Spy.

R7 M260 1897
+10.7%

GT 735M 1713

3DMark Vantage Performance

3DMark Vantage is an outdated DirectX 10 benchmark using 1280x1024 screen resolution. It taxes the graphics card with two scenes, one depicting a girl escaping some militarized base located within a sea cave, the other displaying a space fleet attack on a defenseless planet. It was discontinued in April 2017, and Time Spy benchmark is now recommended to be used instead.

R7 M260 5425

GT 735M 5688
+4.8%

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 M260 1067
+4.3%

GT 735M 1024

3DMark Cloud Gate GPU

Cloud Gate is an outdated DirectX 11 feature level 10 benchmark that was used for home PCs and basic notebooks. It displays a few scenes of some weird space teleportation device launching spaceships into unknown, using fixed resolution of 1280x720. Just like Ice Storm benchmark, it has been discontinued in January 2020 and replaced by 3DMark Night Raid.

R7 M260 5603

GT 735M 6757
+20.6%

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:

900p	12−14 −41.7%	17 +41.7%
Full HD	13 −53.8%	20 +53.8%

Cost per frame, $

1080p

61.46

no data

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077

4−5

+0%

4−5

+0%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −14.3%	16−18 +14.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −3%	30−35 +3%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Far Cry New Dawn	3−4 −33.3%	4−5 +33.3%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −14.3%	16−18 +14.3%
Red Dead Redemption 2	2−3 −50%	3−4 +50%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	10−12 −9.1%	12−14 +9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −3%	30−35 +3%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
Cyberpunk 2077	4−5 +0%	4−5 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Forza Horizon 4	2−3 −150%	5−6 +150%
Hitman 3	6−7 +0%	6−7 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	14−16 −14.3%	16−18 +14.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider	8−9 −12.5%	9−10 +12.5%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	3 −300%	12−14 +300%
Watch Dogs: Legion	30−35 −3%	30−35 +3%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2

2−3

−50%

3−4
+50%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Far Cry New Dawn	2−3 +0%	2−3 +0%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare	0−1	1−2
Cyberpunk 2077	1−2 +0%	1−2 +0%
Far Cry 5	1−2 −100%	2−3 +100%
Hitman 3	7−8 +0%	7−8 +0%
Horizon Zero Dawn	4−5 −25%	5−6 +25%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt	0−1	1−2
Watch Dogs: Legion	6−7 −50%	9−10 +50%