Quadro RTX 6000 vs Radeon R7 M260

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon R7 M260 with Quadro RTX 6000, including specs and performance data.

R7 M260
2014
4 GB DDR3
1.15

RTX 6000 outperforms R7 M260 by a whopping 3516% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking104376
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.036.37
Power efficiencyno data12.69
ArchitectureGCN 3.0 (2014−2019)Turing (2018−2022)
GPU code nameTopazTU102
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date11 June 2014 (10 years ago)13 August 2018 (6 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$799 $6,299

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

The higher the performance-to-price ratio, the better. We use the manufacturer's recommended prices for comparison.

RTX 6000 has 21133% better value for money than R7 M260.

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 cores3844608
Compute units6no data
Core clock speed940 MHz1440 MHz
Boost clock speed980 MHz1770 MHz
Number of transistors1,550 million18,600 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm12 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data260 Watt
Texture fill rate23.52509.8
Floating-point processing power0.7526 TFLOPS16.31 TFLOPS
ROPs896
TMUs24288
Tensor Coresno data576
Ray Tracing Coresno data72

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 sizemedium sizedno data
Bus supportPCIe 3.0 x8no data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data267 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsNone1x 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 typeDDR3GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount4 GB24 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit384 Bit
Memory clock speed900 MHz1750 MHz
Memory bandwidth14.4 GB/s672.0 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 ConnectorsNo outputs4x DisplayPort, 1x USB Type-C

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+-

API and SDK compatibility

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

DirectXDirectX® 1212 Ultimate (12_1)
Shader Model6.36.5
OpenGL4.34.6
OpenCL2.02.0
Vulkan-1.2.131
Mantle+-
CUDA-7.5
DLSS-+

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.

R7 M260 1.15
RTX 6000 41.58
+3516%

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 512
RTX 6000 18578
+3529%

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 HD13
−3362%
450−500
+3362%

Cost per frame, $

1080p61.46
−339%
14.00
+339%
  • RTX 6000 has 339% lower cost per frame in 1080p

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Fortnite 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−3471%
250−260
+3471%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−3233%
300−310
+3233%
Valorant 30−35
−3385%
1150−1200
+3385%

Full HD
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 27−30
−3471%
1000−1050
+3471%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Dota 2 16−18
−3338%
550−600
+3338%
Fortnite 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−3471%
250−260
+3471%
Grand Theft Auto V 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
Metro Exodus 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−3233%
300−310
+3233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 4
−3400%
140−150
+3400%
Valorant 30−35
−3385%
1150−1200
+3385%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Dota 2 16−18
−3338%
550−600
+3338%
Forza Horizon 4 7−8
−3471%
250−260
+3471%
Hogwarts Legacy 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 9−10
−3233%
300−310
+3233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
Valorant 30−35
−3385%
1150−1200
+3385%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Fortnite 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%

1440p
High Preset

Counter-Strike 2 0−1 0−1
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive 8−9
−3400%
280−290
+3400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 12−14
−3233%
400−450
+3233%
Valorant 4−5
−3400%
140−150
+3400%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Forza Horizon 4 3−4
−3233%
100−105
+3233%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%

1440p
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%

4K
High Preset

Grand Theft Auto V 14−16
−3233%
500−550
+3233%
Valorant 6−7
−3400%
210−220
+3400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Dota 2 1−2
−3400%
35−40
+3400%
Far Cry 5 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%
PLAYERUNKNOWN'S BATTLEGROUNDS 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%

4K
Epic Preset

Fortnite 2−3
−3400%
70−75
+3400%

This is how R7 M260 and RTX 6000 compete in popular games:

  • RTX 6000 is 3362% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.15 41.58
Recency 11 June 2014 13 August 2018
Maximum RAM amount 4 GB 24 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 12 nm

RTX 6000 has a 3515.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 500% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 133.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Quadro RTX 6000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon R7 M260 in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon R7 M260 is a notebook card while Quadro RTX 6000 is a workstation one.

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 M260
Radeon R7 M260
NVIDIA Quadro RTX 6000
Quadro RTX 6000

Other comparisons

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.


3.1 227 votes

Rate Radeon R7 M260 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 134 votes

Rate Quadro RTX 6000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about Radeon R7 M260 or Quadro RTX 6000, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.