Radeon R7 260 vs RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)

VS

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) with Radeon R7 260, including specs and performance data.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
2020
15 Watt
6.04

R7 260 outperforms RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

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

Place in the ranking586531
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data3.74
Power efficiency27.615.41
ArchitectureVega (2017−2020)GCN 2.0 (2013−2017)
GPU code nameVega RenoirBonaire
Market segmentLaptopDesktop
Designno datareference
Release date7 January 2020 (4 years ago)17 December 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$109

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 cores384768
Core clock speed400 MHzno data
Boost clock speed1500 MHz1100 MHz
Number of transistorsno data2,080 million
Manufacturing process technology7 nm28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt115 Watt
Texture fill rateno data48.00
Floating-point processing powerno data1.536 TFLOPS
ROPsno data16
TMUsno data48

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 supportno dataPCIe 3.0
Interfaceno dataPCIe 3.0 x16
Lengthno data170 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1 x 6-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 typeno dataGDDR5
Maximum RAM amountno data2 GB
Memory bus widthno data128 Bit
Memory clock speedno data1625 MHz
Memory bandwidthno data104 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 data1x DVI, 1x HDMI, 1x 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 audiono data+

API compatibility

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

DirectX12_1DirectX® 12
Shader Modelno data6.3
OpenGLno data4.6
OpenCLno data2.0

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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 6.04
R7 260 7.50
+24.2%

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.

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) 2793
R7 260 4380
+56.8%

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 HD20
−20%
24−27
+20%
1440p28
−7.1%
30−35
+7.1%
4K20
−20%
24−27
+20%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data4.54
1440pno data3.63
4Kno data4.54

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 11
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 14
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Cyberpunk 2077 9
−11.1%
10−11
+11.1%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Hitman 3 11
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 97
−23.7%
120−130
+23.7%
Metro Exodus 23
−17.4%
27−30
+17.4%
Red Dead Redemption 2 22
−22.7%
27−30
+22.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21−24
−22.7%
27−30
+22.7%
Watch Dogs: Legion 62
−21%
75−80
+21%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Battlefield 5 16−18
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 6
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Far Cry New Dawn 18−20
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Hitman 3 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 73
−23.3%
90−95
+23.3%
Metro Exodus 17
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Red Dead Redemption 2 14
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 21
−14.3%
24−27
+14.3%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 20−22
−20%
24−27
+20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50
−20%
60−65
+20%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 16−18
−12.5%
18−20
+12.5%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 8−9
−12.5%
9−10
+12.5%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Cyberpunk 2077 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Far Cry 5 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 40−45
−22%
50−55
+22%
Hitman 3 12−14
−23.1%
16−18
+23.1%
Horizon Zero Dawn 17
−23.5%
21−24
+23.5%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 18
−16.7%
21−24
+16.7%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 11
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Watch Dogs: Legion 50−55
−17.6%
60−65
+17.6%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 14
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 12−14
−16.7%
14−16
+16.7%
Far Cry New Dawn 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Cyberpunk 2077 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Far Cry 5 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%
Forza Horizon 4 18−20
−10.5%
21−24
+10.5%
Hitman 3 10−11
−20%
12−14
+20%
Horizon Zero Dawn 14−16
−14.3%
16−18
+14.3%
Metro Exodus 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Watch Dogs: Legion 40−45
−12.5%
45−50
+12.5%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 10−12
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−20%
6−7
+20%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Hitman 3 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%
Horizon Zero Dawn 11
−9.1%
12−14
+9.1%
Metro Exodus 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 4−5
+0%
4−5
+0%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Cyberpunk 2077 0−1 0−1
Far Cry 5 3−4
+0%
3−4
+0%
Forza Horizon 4 6−7
−16.7%
7−8
+16.7%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 1−2
+0%
1−2
+0%
Watch Dogs: Legion 2−3
+0%
2−3
+0%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−14.3%
8−9
+14.3%

This is how RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) and R7 260 compete in popular games:

  • R7 260 is 20% faster in 1080p
  • R7 260 is 7% faster in 1440p
  • R7 260 is 20% faster in 4K

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 6.04 7.50
Recency 7 January 2020 17 December 2013
Chip lithography 7 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 115 Watt

RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) has an age advantage of 6 years, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 666.7% lower power consumption.

R7 260, on the other hand, has a 24.2% higher aggregate performance score.

The Radeon R7 260 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) is a notebook card while Radeon R7 260 is a desktop one.


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 RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000)
AMD Radeon R7 260
Radeon R7 260

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.


4 695 votes

Rate Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 50 votes

Rate Radeon R7 260 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.